04 iaea tcm 2012 boytsov


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Here is the forecast of enrichment requirements. In the Upper case, enrichment demand is expected to increase from about 46 million SWU today to almost 106 million SWU. The reference case has demand increasing to about 79 million SWU and The lower case has demand decreasing to about 31 million SWU.
  • 04 iaea tcm 2012 boytsov

    1. 1. CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY 2011 Uranium market outlook and the role of sandstone type deposits in uranium supply Alexander Boytsov – EVP Exploration Vienna, IAEA, June 2012 TCM on sandstone type uranium deposits|1| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    2. 2. Cautionary Statement 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARYReaders are advised to refer to independent technical reports containing detailed information with respect to the material properties of Uranium One. These technicalreports are available under the profile of Uranium One Inc. at www.sedar.com and provide the date of each resource or reserve estimate, details of the key assumptions,methods and parameters used in the estimates, details of quantity and grade or quality of each resource or reserve and a general discussion of the extent to which theestimate may be materially affected by any known environmental, permitting, legal, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. The technical reports alsoprovide information with respect to data verification in the estimation.Scientific and technical information contained herein has been reviewed on behalf of Uranium One by Mr. M.H.G. Heyns, Pr.Sci.Nat. (SACNASP), MSAIMM, MGSSA,Senior Vice President of Uranium One Inc., a Qualified Person for the purposes of NI 43-101.Certain of the statements herein are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include but are not limited to those with respect to the price of uranium, theestimation of mineral resources and reserves, the realization of mineral reserve estimates, the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production,capital expenditures, costs and timing of the development of new deposits, success of exploration activities, permitting time lines, currency fluctuations, requirements foradditional capital, government regulation of mining operations, environmental risks, costs of environmental compliance including reclamation expenses, title disputes orclaims and limitations on insurance coverage and the timing and possible outcome of litigation or investigations. In certain cases, forward-looking statements can beidentified by the use of words such as “plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates” or“does not anticipate”, or “believes” or variations of such words and phrases, or state that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” betaken, occur or be achieved. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results,performance or achievements of Uranium One to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, among others, the actual price of uranium, the actual results of current exploration activities, conclusions ofeconomic evaluations, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, possible variations in grade and ore densities or recovery rates, failure of plant,equipment or processes to operate as anticipated, accidents, labour disputes or other risks of the mining industry, delays in obtaining government approvals or financingor in completion of development or construction activities, risks relating to the completion or integration of acquisitions and to international operations, as well as thosefactors referred to in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in Uranium One’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2011, which is available atwww.sedar.com, and which should be reviewed in conjunction with this document. Although Uranium One has attempted to identify important factors that could causeactual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or resultsnot to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future eventscould differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Uranium Oneexpressly disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise,except in accordance with applicable securities laws.For further information about Uranium One, please visit www.uranium1.com. |2| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    3. 3. World Uranium Requirements, (WNA 2011 Nuclear Fuel Market Report) 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY tU  Despite Fukushima accident the prospects for new worldwide reactors construction continue to be strong.  In the reference scenario, world reactor-related uranium requirements will grow from 64 ktU in 2010 to 108 ktU in 2030, an increase of nearly 70%.|3| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    4. 4. Uranium demand and supply sources 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY SUPPLY DEMAND Main factors of demand/supply relationship • Favorable uranium • HEU-LEU program • Selection of tails assay • Uranium as a trading prices • Commercial and commodity (stocks • Load factors • Sufficient and low cost government inventories trading) uranium resources maintenance • Extending cycle length and enrichment levels • Inventories build • Uranium production • Policy in depleted U re- capacities enrichment, spent fuel • Improved fuel design and and HEU reprocessing management • Increased burn up|4| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    5. 5. SecondaryPRESENTATION | JANUARY 2011 CORPORATE supplies kt U 20 Expiry of HEU Agreement 15 tU 10 5 0 2008 2009 2010 2011f 2012f 2013f 2014f 2015f 2016f 2017f 2018f 2019f 2020f  WNA 2011 Nuclear Fuel Market Report.  Ux Consulting Uranium Market Outlook Q1 2012. Secondary U supplies decline from 17,000 tU Secondary U supplies after HEU agreement in 2011 to 14,000 tU after 2013, but in 2019 will expires will decline from 17,000 tU to 9,000 tU increase to about 16,000 tU.|5| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    6. 6. Anticipated uranium production through 2030 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY WNA scenarios for prospective uranium production, tU  Reference production is expected to increase to 75,000 tU by 2020 and to 90,000 tU by 2030. Source: WNA 2011 Nuclear Fuel Market Report|6| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    7. 7. Historical uranium supply and demand relationship CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY 2011Source: IAEA/OECD Red Book, January 1, 2009 Source: UxC Uranium Market Outlook Q1 2012 Since 1945 Kt U Production was substantially ahead of reactor requirements until Produced 2 519 1985, but has since fallen below. Since 1985, requirements have exceeded production by approximately 450,000 tU. The difference Consumed 1 978 was covered by inventories and other secondary sources. Stockpiled 541 Low uranium prices did not stimulate uranium production.|7| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    8. 8. Recent world uranium PRESENTATION | JANUARY 2011 CORPORATE production2004-2011world uranium production by country, tU 2004-2011 ISL U production, tU *  World uranium production gradually expanded in 2006-2010, by 35%. In 2011 it reached 53 ,2 KtU – slightly lower than in 2010  An estimated 70% of new global production this decade will come from Kazakhstan and Africa  Six countries produce U by ISL method: Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, USA, Russia, Australia, China  The share of ISL production increased from 20% in 2005 to 45% in 2011, including 37% from Kazakhstan (19450t), while other countries maintain ISL production at a level of 4700tU/year|8| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    9. 9. Factors affecting uraniumPRESENTATION | JANUARY 2011 CORPORATE production Resources Actual worldwide U production vs. UxC forecastFinancialrisks Technical risks U production Political,Geological and ecological Political,mining risks and social Deposit Financial Technical social risks risks risks risksActual production is often behind the forecasts: OD expansion V V Fukushima accident Сigar Lake V V Speculative announcements Imouraren V V Low price – high production cost Jabiluka V Technical problems Political, social and environmental factors Elkon V |9| TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    10. 10. WNA / UxC reference case uranium supply demand 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY Source: UxC Uranium Market Outlook Q1 2012 Source: WNA 2011 Nuclear Fuel Market Report In 2010-2011 the market was over-supplied. Primary uranium mining and secondary sourcesproduced 70,755 tU, compared with uranium requirements of 63,824 tU. The explanation is inventorybuilding in China. Beyond 2011, demand and supply are expected to be very much in balance to 2025, with some smallsurpluses.After 2025 demand is expected to continue to rise, with uranium production not quite keeping up| 10 | TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    11. 11. World uranium resources 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY (IAEA/OECD Red Book, at January 1st 2009) IAEA/OECD Red Book January 1, 2009. Identified Known uranium resources by countries, ktU Resources at cost US$ <260/kgU (~US$ 100/lb U3O8) totalled 6,306 ktU.  Identified uranium resources of the cost category World recoverable U of US$ < 80/kgU constitute 3,742 ktU (59 % of total). resources - 6306 th.t  Australia amounted to 27% of total Identified (IAEA/OECD-2009) Resources in 2009 (~1,700 ktU), followed by Kazakhstan (832 ktU, 13%), Russia (566 ktU, 9%). Sandstone type related uranium resources comprise 26% of total and 22% in below 80$/kgU Kazakhstan contain 40% of total sandstone type resources and 65% in below 80$/kgU category Cost ranges, USD/KgU Cost rangesCategory <130$/ kg <260$/ kg <40$/kgU <80$/kgU U U RAR 570 2516 3524 4004 Inferred 226 1226 1879 2302 Total 796 3742 5403 6306| 11 | TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    12. 12. Uranium resources as a key factor| JANUARY 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION for sustainable uranium production Uranium production forecast by leading companies, tU 2011 uranium resources by leading companies, ktU Total U resources – 5 Mt (in-situ) * * U ranium One – no P1 resources Depletion of U resources by leading companies, tU  Aggregated U production in 2012 ––2030 estimated  Aggregated U production in 2012 2030 estimated at 1,5 MtU, which is 24% of total resources and at 1,5 MtU, which is 24% of total resources and 40% of resources below US$80/kgU category 40% of resources below US$80/kgU category  U resources of primary uranium mines will be  U resources of primary uranium mines will be decreased by 2030 more than two fold, more than decreased by 2030 more than two fold, more than aahalf of the remaining U resources will be in the half of the remaining U resources will be in the Olympic Dam (copper is main) Olympic Dam (copper is main)  After 2020, uranium market may face shortage of  After 2020, uranium market may face shortage of low cost U resources needed to maintain low cost U resources needed to maintain production. production.  ItIt is necessary to intensify uranium exploration aimed at  is necessary to intensify uranium exploration aimed at discovery new low cost uranium resources. discovery new low cost uranium resources. | 12 | TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COMSource: W NA estimates, companies’ data
    13. 13. Principal exploration stages 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY| 13 | TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    14. 14. Regional metallogenic studies 2011 CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY (after I.Pechenkin) Main target To determine areas favorable for redox front zones Scale 1: 2 500 000 to 1: 1 000 000 (to 500 000) Drilling No Tasks To determine areas for prospecting and exploration Recognition criteria Climate Arid and semiarid climate Geotectonic Post-platform syn orogeny tectonic conditions Hydrodynamic Artesian basins with infiltrational water exchange Red bed and brown molasse sediments, interfaced upwards Lithology by terrigene grey sediments Lithification Low consolidated terrigene permeable sediments| 14 | TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    15. 15. Regional reconnaissance CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY 2011 (after I.Pechenkin) Main target To determine redox front zones and favorable for uranium areas Scale 1: 500 000 to 1: 200 000 Drill spacing 12,8 x 6,4-3,2km To develop exploration model, to evaluate prognosticated resources Tasks P2 Recognition criteria Sand, sand-gravel sediments of alluvial, inshore- and shallow- Lithology marine origin Tectonic Activated syncline, graben, buried paleovalleys Hydrogeology Infiltration aquifer horizons Hydrogeochemica Oxygen rich aquifer environment, interfaced by reduction l environment in direction of migration Radiogeochemica Favorable source of U in the area, such as primary uranium l enriched rocks Mineralogy Aquifers containing sediments enriched by organic matter and iron disulfides. Epigenetic alterations in permeable sediments| 15 | TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    16. 16. General exploration CORPORATE PRESENTATION | JANUARY 2011 (after I.Pechenkin) Main target Deposit discovery Scale 1: 100 000 1: 50 000 1: 25 000 Drill spacing 6,4 x 6,4 km 3200 x 1600 (50)m 1600 x 800 (50)m Mineralization Mineralization Redox front zone Tasks detection within the delineation, resources mapping redox zone preliminary evaluation Recognition criteria Hydrogeology High uranium contents in oxygenous underground waters (> 3x10 -6 g/l U), its high variation Hydrodynamic High speed of oxygenic underground waters migration, providing active uranium supply to redox front zone Structural Penetration of oxygenic underground waters or reductants through permeable zones Geochemistry Oxidation zones interfaces within grey sediments Microbiological Aureoles of anaerobic bacteria intensive development Hydrogeochemisry Areas of elevated Eh and uranium concentration reduction in flow direction. Alteration Indicators of reduction interface at adjacent of oxidation zones: epigenetic pyritization, redeposited organic matter, radioactive anomalies.| 16 | TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM
    17. 17. Principal parameters for sulphuricCORPORATEISL mining* 2011 acid PRESENTATION | JANUARY Lithology Sands, clay fraction below 30% Ore productivity, kgU/m2 Above 1 Depth of ore body Below 900 Aquifer thickness 1 to 30m Carbonate (CO2) in ore, % Below 2 Hydrogeology Water confining beds above and below aquifer, no hydraulic connection TDS, g/dm3 Below 10 Water table level Above the aquifer Hydraulic conductivity, m/day Above 1 Transmissivity, m2/day Above 10 Environmental No potable water supply*- IAEA-TECDOC-1239, Manual of acid in situ leach uranium mining technology. | 17 | TSX: UUU | JSE: UUU WWW.URANIUM1.COM 17