Gettion IMS Doc. enreg. le iJjbiLlJJUL. W TRN : Hiii\loki±%.m Destination . 1,1+D.D UKBOTUH 1991 RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND h%A i»o \S» - ***'

A JOINT REPORT BY THE OECD NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY AND THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY 1®

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPfAAT.O N AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION r~— ~ AND DEVELOPMENT

" Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall proatote policies designed: " '—'" ld~achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; — to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and — to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium,Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971) and New Zealand (29th May 1973). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD (Article 13 of the OECD Convention).

NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY

The OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) was established on 1st February 1958 under the name of the OEEC European Nuclear Energy Agency. It received its present designation on 20th April 1972, when Japan became its first non- European full Member. NEA membership today consists of all European Member countries of OECD as well as Australia, Canada, Japan and the United States. The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the Agency. The primary objective of NEA is to promote co-operation among the governments of its participating countries in furthering the development of nuclear power as a safe, environmentally acceptable and economic energy source. This is achieved by: — encouraging harmonization of national regulatory policies and practices, with particular reference to the safety of nuclear installations, protection of man against ionising radiation and preservation of the environment, radioactive waste management, and nuclear third party liability and insurance; — assessing the contribution of nuclear power to the overall energy supply by keeping under review the technical and economic aspects of nuclear power growth and forecasting demand and supply for the different phases of the nuclear fuel cycle; — developing exchanges of scientific and technical information particularly through participation in common services; — setting up international research and development programmes and joint undertakings. In these and related task., NEA works in dose collaboration with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, with which it has concluded a Co-operation Agreement, as well as with other international organisations in the nuclear field.

Public en franfaii «ou» le utrc : LRANIUM IWI KESSOURCES. PRODUCTION ET DEMANDE RappcKI ctaNi rim|

©OECD 1992 Applications for permission to reproduce or translate all or part of this publication should be made to: Head of Publications Service, OECD 2, rue Andr6-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16. France PREFACE

Since the mid-1960s, with the co-operation of their Member countries, the OECD Nuclear Energy- Agency (NEA) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), have periodically published joint reports on world uranium resources, production and demand, commonly known as the'Red Book". This 1991 Interim Edition is the fourteenth in the series. It is based on information up to 1991. The previous publication was the 1989 Main Edition.

The Main Edition of the Red Book is produced once every four years. It presents a comprehensive assessment of the uranium supply and demand situation at present and over the long-term (about 40 years). The basis for the assessment consists of estimates of uranium resources in several categories of assurance of existence and economic attractiveness, and projections of production capability, installed nuclear capacity, and related reactor requirements. Annual statistical data are included on exploration expenditures, uranium production, employment, and levels of uranium stocks. In addition to the global analysis, detailed national reports are provided concerning uranium resources, exploration, production activities, and relevant uranium policies.

The shorter version of the Red Book, known as the Interim Edition, is also produced once every four years but is timed to come out two years after the Main Edition. Thus, one version of the Red Book is published every two years. The Interim Edition updates uranium resource estimates and the statistical information. Additionally, it provides a re-assessment of the uranium supply and demand situation. The re-assessment focuses on developments over the previous two-year period that impact on the short-term outlook (about 15 years). Data and information related to the long-term assessment are not included.

The contents of this publication have been prepared on the basis of data solicited through questionnaires sent by NEA to its Member Countries and by the IAEA to those of its Member States. Although some countries prepared comprehensive national reports which are presented essentially in their original form (Chapter VI), a number of these reports were prepared by each Agency on the basis of the questionnaire responses it had received. Preparation of the remaining chapters of the report was divided equally between the two Agencies, with the NEA's responsibilities being carried out under the general guidance of the NEA Uranium Group.

This report reviews the uranium supply position throughout the world by evaluating and compiling data on uranium resources, past and present production, and plans for future production. The data, provided by over 40 countries, are then compared with possible future reactor related uranium requirements. Recent levels of exploration for uranium are also reported and analysed.

Some information on short-term uranium demand has been provided by national authorities in response to the questionnaires up to the year 2010. Longer-term projections of uranium demand were covered in the 1989 Main Edition of the report and will be addressed again in 1993.

3 Finally, it should be noted that in December 1991, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was established when the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) ceased to exist. The CIS is composed of the following 11 countries of the former USSR: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kirgiztan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzebekistan. Reference is also made to the Newly Independent States (NIS) in certain sections of the text concerning uranium demand. The NIS includes all areas that were commonly referred to in the past as the USSR, including Lativia, Lithuania, and Estonia which are not members of the CIS.

A Statistical Update report, confirming the historical data and updating the short-term forecasts will be published in 1992. The reader will find an order form at the end of the reportwit h which to request a free copy of this report.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Nuclear Energy Agency of OECD (NEA), Paris, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Vienna, would like to acknowledge the co-operation of those organisations (see Annex 2), which replied to the questionnaire submitted to them.

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9

DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY 13

I. URANIUM RESOURCES 20

A. Known Conventional Resources 20 B. Undiscovered Conventional Resources 25 C. Unconventional and By-product Resources 27 D. Resources in Non-Reponing Countries 29

II. URANIUM EXPLORATION 30

Introduction 30 A. Current Activities and Recent Developments 30 B. Exploration Expenditure Trends 36

III. URANIUM PRODUCTION 37

Background 37 A. Present Status of the Production Industry 37 B. Future Production Possibilities 44 C. Projected Production Capabilities 46

IV. URANIUM DEMAND 50

Background 50 A. Current Nuclear Generating Capacity Programmes and Reactor-Related Uranium Requirements 52 B. Nuclear Power Growth to 2010, and Projected Related Uranium Requirements 58

5 URANIUM SUPPLY AND DEMAND RELATIONSHIPS 62

A. Current Trends 62 B. Outlook to 2010 69 C. The Impact of Recent Developments on the Long-Term Perspective 72

NATIONAL REPORTS ON URANIUM EXPLORATION, RESOURCES AND PRODUCTION 74

Argentina 75 Australia 78 Belgium 85 Brazil 88 Bulgaria 91 Canada 94 Chile 107 China 109 Cuba 115 Denmark 116 Egypt 117 Finland 119 France 124 Germany 130 Greece 146 Hungary 149 India 152 Indonesia 154 Ireland 156 Italy 156 Japan 158 Jordan 162 Korea, Republic of 163 Malaysia 166 Mexico 166 Netherlands 169 Niger 171 Norway 173 Peru 173 Portugal 175 Romania 181 South Africa 183 Spain 186 Sweden 190 Switzerland 194 Thailand 197 Turkey 198 United Kingdom 201 United Stales 206 USSR 216

6 Viet Nam 227 Yugoslavia 232 Zambia 235 Zimbabwe 236

ANNEXES

1. Members of the NEA Uranium Group 239 2. List of reporting organisations 241 3. Geologic setting of uranium deposits 244 4. Index of national reports in Red Books 1965-1990 248 5. Energy conversion factors 251 6. Currency exchange rates 254

7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents results of the 1991 review of uranium supply and demand in the World. It contains data on uranium exploration activities, resources and production for over 40 countries, updating the previous 1989 Main Edition Red Book. This edition of the Red Book contains significant new information about a number of countries including Bulgaria, the former German Democratic Republic (GDR), Hungary, Romania, the USSR and Viet Nam, for which national reports have been submitted for the first time.

Estimates of Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) recoverable at costs of $80/kg U or less for selected countries (excluding the USSR, most Eastern European countries, and China) have declined since the last assessment in 1989. Taking into account the production of about 60 000 tonnes U during the 2-year interval, a net decrease of about 97 000 tonnes U occurred during 1989 and 1990. As of January 1, 1991, low-cost RAR were estimated at 1 389 000 tonnes U.

Estimated Additional Resources - Category I (EAR-I) in the low cost category increased slightly from 773 000 tonnes U to about 791 000 tonnes U, the major increases being reported in Canada and Niger.

Estimates of RAR recoverable at costs between $80 - 130Ag U have decreased slightly from 655 000 tonnes U in 1989 to 610 000 tonnes U in 1991, mainly as a result of a few countries reporting small reductions in resources and a 28 000 tonne change reported by Canada. Estimates of EAR-I in the same cost category declined by 56 000 tonnes to about 335 000 tonnes U total, due essentially to changes in Australia, Canada, France, and South Africa.

Total RAR and EAR-I combined - i.e., "known" resources - recoverable at costs of $130/kg U or less, are estimated at 3.125 million tonnes U as of January 1, 1991, a decrease of about 240 000 tonnes (7 per cent) from early 1989. While much of the decline in resources can be attributed to production and insufficient replacement by new resourcesdurin g the two year period 1989 to 1990, a significant portion is related to mine closures in traditional supplier countries (e.g., Canada, France, South Africa, and the United States). Such developments can have a significant impact on the long term uranium supply capability in these producing countries because in many cases the residual resources associated with production centres that have been permanently closed may never be economically recoverable by conventional methods.

Although resource data are limited, significant uranium resources are known to exist in a number of Asian and Eastern European countries including Bulgaria, China, Czech and Slovak Federal Republics, Hungary, India, Romania and the USSR. All of the uranium resources in the former GDR have been classified as being recoverable at costs higher than $130/kg U, while those reported for Hungary are relatively small and limited to a single deposit. The USSR has reported "known" uranium resources of 685 000 tonnes U recoverable at costs of $l30/kg U or less. Significantly, these estimates are expressed in in-situ tonnages, with no allowance fcr mining and milling losses, and an unspecified

9 portion of already mined resources still included. Known resources totalling some 140 000 tonnes U have been reported for Chile, China, India and Romania, but without any information about recoverability and unassigned to any cost category.

Uranium resources in the low cost category (up to $80/kg U) are approximately 465 000 tonnes U in the USSR/Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). While the total high cost (recoverable at reported or assumed costs of up to $130/kg U) resources for China, India, Romania, and the USSR/CIS are about 829 000 tonnes U, it must be noted, however, that an unspecified portion of these resources is exhausted.

There remains very good potential for the discovery of additional uranium resources of conventional type, as reflected by estimates of EAR-II and Speculative Resources. Based on reported estimates, this potential could range from 8 million to as much as 13 million tonnes U. So two thirds of this potential occurs in Australia, Canada, South Africa, and the United States, while about one quarter occurs in China and the USSR/CIS.

Beyond the conventional resources noted above, there are also large tonnages of unconventional resources of uranium, the bulk of which are associated with marine phosphates. Current production from such resources is limited, both geographically and in terms of output.

Total uranium exploration expenditures in the selected countries for 1990 continued to be in the US$141 million range in current dollars, the expected 1991 exploration expenditures are about $23 million below this range chiefly due to decreases in the USA and France. Sizeable exploration programmes are being conducted in Australia, Canada, France, India, and the United States. A significant portion of the total exploration expenditure is funded by major uranium consuming countries such as France, Germany, and Japan.

Since the late 1930s, cumulative production in countries outside the USSR, Eastern Europe and China has totalled about 1 million tonnes U, with the bulk of this output coming from the United States, Canada, Germany, Namibia, Niger, and South Africa. In addition, some 213 000 tonnes U and 21 000 tonnes U have been produced in the former GDR and Hungary respectively. Reliable cumulative production data for the USSR, other Eastern European countries, and China, however, are not available yet.

Uranium production has declined considerably from 1988 through 1990. Since the mid 1980s, annual uranium production has been below "projected" reactor-related requirements by a few thousand tonnes U annually. It is expected that world reactor-related requirements will increase from about 50 000 tonnes U in 1990 to about 77 000 tonnes U by the year 2010. Some utilities will continue to be able to supplement or offset their purchase requirements by drawdown of excess inventory, and annual uranium production should remain below actual requirements until some target level of stocks is reached.

Annual production capability from EXISTING and COMMITTED production centres in selected countries, supported by known low-cost resources, is expected to increase slightly in the early 1990s from about 33 000 tonnes U in 1991 to some 37 000 tonnes U by 1995. This level would not meet anticipated world reactor requirements of about 60 919 tonnes U in 1995. The shortfall in production could be delayed by a continued drawdown of surplus inventory. It could be met by some combination of: development of production centres in the PLANNED and PROSPECTIVE category, imports from certain Eastern European and Asian countries, and the possible development of certain other identified deposits which are not incorporated in the projections of short-term production capability. Projections

10 of total production capability from all four classes of production centres peak in 1995 at around 41 000 tonnes U per year, relying on low-cost resources only, and at about 56 000 tonnes U, if high-cost resources are also considered.

By the year 2000, production capability supported by additional higher cost resources could, if developed, approach 60 470 tonnes U per year. Reactor requirements were projected to be around 67 819 tonnes U per year in 2000. It should be recognised that further low-cost resources could become available wiuYn this time frame, as a result of technical developments or policy changes in certain countries. Toward the end of the century, it is expected that supply and demand will be more in balance with the need for new production to be brought on stream to meet an increasing demand.

It is clear that nuclear power will continue to play an important role in the electricity supply mix in many countries and that significant quantities of uranium will be required to support this generating capacity. However, the role of traditional uranium suppliers has become less certain over the reporting period, as utilities have become increasingly reliant on non-traditional suppliers, and on inventories.

How successful the USSR/CIS will be over the remainder of the decade in penetrating Western markets remains to be seen. Meanwhile, in the traditional supplier countries, increasing emphasis on environmental, health and safety standards is placing upward pressure on costs at a time when prices have been falling due to new competition from non-traditional suppliers.

Without some positive signs of price recovery, worldwide exploration levels are likely to remain low, or even decline further. Without additional discoveries, and with the permanent closure of existing production centres, the uranium industry's supply capability, particularly that based on low-cost resources, will continue to erode.

Clearly, the longer prices remain at their current low level, the more difficult it will be for supply capability to adjust to requirements, and the higher the recovery in price when it occurs.

When forecasting the future of nuclear power beyond the turn of the century, all projections arc fraught with uncertainties and thus must be used with caution. Nuclear power growth will be greatly influenced by: economic factors (changes in energy demand resulting from global economic growth, and the relative economics of nuclear versus fossil-fuel generated electricity); environmental considerations (concerns about the "greenhouse effect", and acid rain); and public attitude toward nuclear power. Technological advancements (introduction of higher bumups, use of MOX fuels and reprocessed U in LWRs and advanced enrichment techniques such as AVLIS) arc not expected to have a major effect on uranium demand during the short-term forecast period.

The current projections of nuclear capacity indicate an increase from about 415 GWc in the year 2000 to 474 GWc in the year 2010. These projections arc restricted by the assumption that public policy and attitude to nuclear power in the foreseeable future would not be radically different from the present situation. Thus the projection docs not consider the possibility that the debate on the "greenhouse effect" could establish nuclear energy as an important factor in reducing emissions of environmentally damaging gases in the coming decades.

After the year 2000, increasing amounts of the additional uranium production needed to cover the expected production shortfall would have to come from new discoveries. A considerable amount of exploration and development effort would be required, on a timely basis, before these potential supply possibilities can be realised. When prices rise sufficiently to provide the industry with appropriate returns on investment, increased levels of exploration can be expected to follow. Should concern about

11 the environment lead to increased reliance on nuclear power, uranium demand could in fact rise substantially over the longer term, as the prospect for further discoveries of uranium is good. Given appropriate incentives through the market place, sufficient uranium should be made available to satisfy demand levels significantly higher than those reflected in the projections in this report.

12 DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY

Only minor changes have been made to the resource terminology and definitions used in this report since the modifications that were introduced in the December 1983 edition of the Red Book.

RESOURCE ESTIMATES

Resource estimates are divided into separate categories reflecting different levels of confidence in the quantities reported. The resources are further separated into categories based on the cost of production. All resource estimates are expressed in terms of metric tons (tonnes) of recoverable uranium (U) rather than uranium ox'de (U308). Estimates refer to quantities of uranium recoverable from mineable ore, unless otherwise noted [see (d)].

a) Definitions of resource categories

Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) refers to uranium that occurs in known mineral deposits of delineated size, grade and configuration such that the quantities which could be recovered within the given production cost ranges with currently proven mining and processing technology, can be specified. Estimates of tonnage and grade are based on specific sample data and measurements of the deposits and on knowledge of deposit characteristics. Reasonably Assured Resources have a high assurance of existence.

Estimated Additional Resources - Category I (EAR-I) refers to uranium in addition to RAR that is inferred to occur, mostly on the basis of direct geological evidence, in extensions of well-explored deposits, or in deposits in which geological continuity has been established but where specific data, including measurements of the deposits, and knowledge of the deposits' characteristics are considered to be inadequate to classify the resource as RAR. Estimates of tonnage, grade and cost of further delineation and recovery are based on such sampling as is available and on knowledge of the deposit characteristics as determined in the best known parts of the deposit or in similar deposits. Less reliance can be placed on the estimates in this category than on those for RAR.

Estimated Additional Resources - Category II (EAR-II) refers to uranium in addition to EAR-I that is expected to occur in deposits for which the evidence is mainly indirect and which are believed to exist in well-defined geological trends or areas of mineralisation with known deposits. Estimates of tonnage, grade and cost of discovery, delineation and recovery are based primarily on knowledge of deposit characteristics in known deposits within the respective trends or areas and on such sampling, geological, geophysical or geochemical evidence as may be available. Less reliance can be placed on the estimates in this category than on those for EAR-I.

13 Speculative Resources (SR) refers to uranium, in addition to Estimated Additional Resources - Category II, that is thought to exist, mostly on the basis of indirect evidence and geological extrapolations, in deposits discoverable with existing exploration techniques. The location of deposits envisaged in this category could generally be specified only as being somewhere within a given region or geological trend. As the term implies, the existence and size of such resources are speculative.

The correlation between the resource categories defined above and those used in other major resource classification systems is shown in Figure 1.

b) Cost categories

The cost categories used in this report are the same as those used in the previous edition: up to $80/kg U, >$80 to $130/kg U and >$130 to $260/kg U. In this edition, the costs will be expressed in terms of 1st January 1991 US$.

NOTE: It is not intended that the cost categories should follow fluctuations in market conditions.

To convert from costs expressed in $/lb U3Og to $/kg U, a factor of 2.6 has been used (e.g. $30/lb U308 = $80/kg U, $50/Ib U308 = $130/kg U and $100/lb U308 = $260/kg U).

Conversion from other currencies into US$ has been done using the exchange rates of 1st January 1991. All resource categories arc defined in terms of costs of uranium recovered at the ore processing plant.

When estimating the cost of production for assigning resources within these cost categories, account has been taken of the following costs:

- the direct costs of mining, transporting and processing the uranium ore; - the costs of associated environmental and waste management; - the costs of maintaining non-operating production units where applicable; - in the case of ongoing projects, those capital costs which remain unamortised; - the capital cost of providing new production units where applicable, including the cost of financing; - indirect costs such as office overheads, taxes and royalties where applicable; - future exploration and development costs wherever required for further ore delineation to the stage where it is ready to be mined.

Sunk costs were not normally taken into consideration.

c) Relationship between resource categories

Figure 2 illustrates the inter-relationship between the different resource categories. The horizontal axis expresses the level of assurance about the actual existence of given tonnages based on varying degrees of geologic knowledge while the vertical axis expresses the economic feasibility of exploitation by the division into cost categories.

14 Figure 1 Approximate Correlations of Terms Used in Major Resource Classification Systems

^- KNOWN RESOURCES • • •

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL REASONABLY ASSURED SPECULATIVE NEA/IAEA II

ESTIMATED REASONABLY ASSURED Australia ADDITIONAL I UNDISCOVERED

Energy, Mines and Resources MEASURED INDICATED INFERRED PROGNOSTICATED SPECULATIVE Canada

PER­ PERSPEC­ France RESERVES I RESERVES 11 SPEC­ TIVE I TIVES II

Fed. Rep. of PROVEN PROBABLE POSSIBLE PROGNOSTICATED SPECULATIVE Germany

ESTIMATED ESTIMATED South Africa REASONABLY ASSURED SPECULATIVE ADDITIONAL I ADDITIONAL II

United States REASONABLY ASSURED DOE ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL I + 11 SPECULATIVE

P1 P2 Some non-WOCA r - B CI C2 countries A1 J A2 D

The terms illustrated are not strictl-.-•»y comparabl- e as the criteria used in the various systems are not identical. -Grey zones- in correlation are therefore unavoidable, particulary as the resources become less assured. Nonetheless, the chart presents a reasonable approximation of the comparability of terms The dashed lines between RAR, EAR-I, EAR-II and SR in the highest cost category indicate that the distinctions of level of confidence are not always clear. The shaded area indicates that because of the degree of confidence in their existence, RAR and EAR-I recoverablea t less than $130/kg U are distinctly important: for the purpose of this report they are referredt o as "known resources". RAR recoverable at prevailing market prices are commonly defined as "Reserves", and may currently constitute a significant portion of the RAR recoverable at $80/kg U or less.

Because resources in EAR-11 and SR categories are essentially undiscovered, the information on them is such that it is not always possible to divide them into different cost categories and this is indicated by the horizontal dashed lines between the different cost categories.

d) Recoverable resources

Resource estimates are expressed in terms of recoverable tonnes of uranium, i.e. quantities of uranium recoverable from mineable ore, as opposed to quantities contained in mineable ore, or quantities in situ. Therefore both expected mining and ore processing losses have been deducted in most cases. Deviations from this practice are indicated in the tables.

e) Types of resources

To obtain a better understanding of the uranium resource situation, reference is made to different geologic types of deposits containing the resourcesan d a distinction is drawn between conventional and unconventional resources, as follows:

i) Geologic types of uranium deposits

The major uranium resources of the world can be assigned on the basis of their geological setting to the following fifteen ore types:

1. Unconformity-related deposits 2. Sandstone deposits 3. Quartz-pebble conglomerate deposits 4. Vein deposits 5. Breccia complex deposits 6. Intrusive deposits 7. Phosphoric deposits 8. Collapse breccia pipe deposits 9. Volcanic deposits 10. Surficial deposits 11. Metasomatite deposits 12. Metamorphite deposits 13. Lignite 14. Black shale deposits 15. Other types of deposits

(See also Annex 3 for a more detailed discussion of these terms).

16 Figure 2 NEA/IAEA Classification Scheme for Uranium Resources

DECREASING CONFIDENCE IN ESTIMATES ii) Conventional and unconventional resources

Conventional resources are those that have an established history of production where uranium is either a primary product, co-product or an important by-product (e.g. gold). The first six geological ore types listed above, together with selected types from category seven, are considered conventional resources. Very low grade resources, which are not now economic or from which uranium is only recoverable as a minor by-product are considered unconventional resources (e.g. phosphates, monazite, coal, lignites, black shales, etc).

PRODUCTION TERMINOLOGY1

a) Production centres

A PRODUCTION CENTRE, as referred to in this report, is a production unit consisting of one or more ore processing plants, one or more associated mines and the resources that arc tributary to them. For the purpose of describing production centres, they have been divided into four classes, as follows:

i) EXISTING production centres arc those that currently exist in operational condition and include those plants which are closed down but which could be readily brought back into operation.

ii) COMMITTED production centres are those that are either under construction or are firmly committed for construction.

iii) PLANNED production centres are those that are planned, based on feasibility studies that arc either completed or under way, but for which construction commitments have not yet been made. This class also includes those plants that are closed which would require substantial expenditures to bring them back into operation.

iv) PROSPECTIVE production centres are those that could be supported by tributary RAR and EAR-I, i.e. "known resources", but for which construction plans have not yet been made.

b) Production capacity and capability

PRODUCTION CAPACITY denotes the nominal level of output, based on the design of the plant and facilities over an extended period under normal commercial operating practice.

PRODUCTION CAPABILITY refers to an estimate of the level of production that could be practically and realistically achieved under favourable circumstances from the plant and facilities at any of the types of production centres described above, given the nature of the resources tributary to them.

]. Manual on the Projection of Uranium Production Capability, General Guidelines, Technical Report Scries No. 238, IAEA, Vienna, 1984.

18 Projections of production capability are supported only by RAR and/or EAR-I. Two projections are presented, one based on only those resources recoverable at costs $80Ag U or less, and a second based on resources recoverable at costs up to $130/kg U.

UNITS

Metric units are used in all tabulations and statements. Resources and production quantities are expressed in terms of metric tons (tonnes) contained uranium (U) rather than uranium oxide (UjOg).

1 short ton U308 = 0.769 tonnes U

$l/lb U3Os = $2.6/kg U

Exploration expenditures are reported in US dollars. Conversions from other currencies have been done using the mid-year exchange rates of the year in which the expenditures were incurred.

GEOLOGICAL TERMS

i) Uranium occurrence

A naturally occurring anomalous concentration of uranium.

ii) Uranium deposit

A mass of naturally occurring mineral material from which uranium could be exploited at present or in the future.

19 I. URANIUM RESOURCES

A. KNOWN CONVENTIONAL RESOURCES

This chapter deals with the known conventional resources, which for the purpose of this report refer to Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) and Estimated Additional Resources - Category I (EAR-1) recoverable at costs of up to US$130/kg U. Included in this chapter are also "other known resources" reported by some countries and not included in RAR or EAR-I; this term was introduced to accommodate those submitted estimates which are not fully consistent with NEA/IAEA resource terminology and definitions.

Conventional resources for the purpose of this report are those that have an established history of production where uranium is either the primary product, co-product or an important by-product. Examples for co-product and by-product uranium are the resources in South Africa and probably a large portion of those in the USSR.

RAR recoverable at prevailing market prices are commonly defined as reserves and may currently constitute only a portion of the RAR recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U.

Tables 1 and 2 list RAR and EAR-I for selected countries2 as of 1st January 1991, recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U and between $80 - 130/kg U. They also include resources from some countries for which no recent estimates are available. In these cases, data from previous Red Books were used and where appropriate, adjusted for resources mined. As in previous editions of the report, RAR and EAR-I were requested in terms of "recoverable" resources. As a number of estimates were reported either as mineable or in situ resources, downward adjustments for mining and/or milling losses ranging from 5 to SO per cent were made in the aggregated RAR and EAR-I.

Table 3 summarizes the other known uranium resources as of 1st January 1991 recoverable at costs of up to $80, between $80 - 130/kg U. This table includes the resources submitted by Chile, China, India, Romania and the USSR, together with notes explaining the nature of these resource estimates. For example, China reported "defined reserves" which are said to be approximately equivalent to the sum of RAR and EAR I, unassigned to any cost category. Romania reported known resources including RAR and EAR-I, also without any cost category, and the USSR reported known resources recoverable at costs of up to US$80, and between US$80 - 130/kg U. As these estimates are based on the Soviet resource categories B + C, + Q, and are therefore not fully equivalent to the known resources defined as RAR + EAR-I and listed in Tables 1 and 2, they should not be aggregated with these totals.

2. Selected countries exclude the USSR, most East European countries and China.

20 Table 1. Reasonably Assured Resources

(in 1000 Tonnes U as of 1st January 1991)

Cost Ranges TOTAL COUNTRY upto$80/kgU S80-130/kgU upto$130/kgU

Algeria (a)(b) 26.00 0.00 26.00 Argentina 8.74 219 10.93 Australia 469.00 6000 529.00 Brazil (c) 162.00 000 162.00 Canada 146.00 6800 214.00 Central African Rep. (c)(d) 8.00 8.00 16.00 Denmark (e)(f) 0.00 27.00 2700 Finland (c) 0.00 1.50 1.50 France 23.80 15.70 39.50 Gabon

TOTAL (rounded) 1499 627 2126 TOTAL (adjusted) (r) 1389 610 1999

(a) Mineable resources. (b) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand" ( Paris, 1982). (c) In situ resources (d) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1986) (e) Equivalent to recoverable resources. (0 OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", ( Paris, 1990). (g) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Pans, 1986), adjusted for estimated production, (h) No information on recoverability available, (i) In the Mecsek deposit. 0) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1988). (k) In black shales. (I) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand",( Paris, 1982), adjusted for estimated production, (m) OECD(NEA)/IAEA "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1979). (n) As of 1.1.1989 adjusted for production, (o) In deposits other than Ranstad. (p) In the Zirovski Vrh deposit, (q) Includes 1000 tonnes U in the KolweziCu-Co deposit, (r) To account for estimated mining and milling losses, not incorporated in certain estimates.

21 Reasonably Assured Resources

Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) in selected countries recoverable at costs up 10 $80Ag U decreased by 157 000 tonnes U or over 10 per cent since the last edition of this report, and total now I 389 000 tonnes U compared with 1 546 000 tonnes U as of 1st January 1991 (Table 1). RAR recoverable at costs between $80 - 13Q/kg U declined by 45 000 tonnes or nearly 7 per cent from 655 000 tonnes U to 610 000 tonnes U. The aggregated total of these two cost categories is 1 999 000 tonnes U, compared with 2 201 000 tonnes U listed in the previous report, the difference being about 200 000 tonnes U or 9 per cent. The ratio between the RAR remains unchanged at 70 per cent in the up to $80/kg U category and 30 per cent in the $80-130/kg U range.

The geographical distribution of the RAR recoverable at costs of $130/kg U or less is shown in Figure I-la.

While much of the decline in the RAR estimates can be attributed to production in these countries of some 68 000 tonnes U and insufficient replacement by new resources during the two year period 1989 to 1990, a significant portion is related to the reassessment of resources due to mine closures in traditional supplier countries (e.g., Canada, South Africa and the United States). Also, the RAR of India, being reported without cost category were included in the other known resources (Table 3).

Estimated Additional Resources - Category I

Estimated Additional Resources - Category I (EAR-I) recoverable at costs below $80/kg U increased by 18 000 tonnes from 773 000 to 791 000 tonnes U (Table 2). EAR-I recoverable at costs between $80- 130/kgU decreased, however, from 391 000 tonnes to 335 000 tonnes U, or by 56 (XX) tonnes U. Total EAR-I recoverable at costs up to $l?0/kg U amount to 1 126 000 tonnes U, a decrease of 38 000 tonnes U from the previously reported estimate of 1 164 000 tonnes U. The share of the $80/kg U portion is 70 per cent of the total, the remainder being in the $80 - 130/kg U cost category.

The geographical distribution of the EAR-I recoverable at costs of up to $130/kg U is shown in Figure I-lb.

The decrease in the EAR-I reflects the lower resource estimates from France and South Africa, which could only partially be compensated by higher estimates of Canada and the new submissions from Hungary and Yugoslavia. In addition, the Indian resources now unassigned to any cost category, were transferred to Table 3 on "Other known uranium resources".

Other Known Resources

The Other Known Resources recoverable at costs up to $80 and between $80 - 130/kg U (Tabic 3) include the resources submitted by Chile, China, India, Romania and the USSR. The largest portion of these resources totalling 685 600 tonnes U as in situ resources arc located in the USSR and belong mainly to the vein, mctasomatic and the sandstone deposit types. A portion of the USSR resources has been exhausted.

22 Figure Ma: Distribution of Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) Among Seloctod Countriaa

(in 1000 forms U)

600

500 |BlUpto$eO»aU •$e0to$130jkgU h

300

200

100

/ */ J ' S/ J */ // S/ s

Figure Mb: Distribution of Estimated Additional Resources Category I Among Selected Countries

(InlOOOTonnMU)

500

400 liuptosayhgu nsao-siao/hgu k

300

200

100 /'s'////y* s/s s

See Table* 1 and 2 for further reference

23 Table 2. Estimated Additional Resources - Category I

(in 1000 Tonnes U as of 1st January 1991)

Cost Ranges TOTAL COUNTRY up to $80/kg U $80-130/kgU upto$130/kgU

Argentina 054 1.95 249 Australia 264.00 126 00 390.00 Austria (a) 0.70 1.00 1.70 Brazil (b) 94 00 0.00 94.00 Canada 149.00 80.00 229.00 Denmark (c)(d) 000 1600 16.00 France 420 3.90 8.10 Gabon (e)(f) 1.30 830 9.60 Germany 1.60 5.70 7.30 Greece (b) 6 00 000 6.00 Hungary (b)(g) 9.10 9.15 18.25 Italy 0.00 1.30 1.30 Korea, Republic of (b)(i) 0.00 300 3.00 Mexico (b) 0.00 0.70 0.70 Namibia (j) 30.00 23.00 53 00 Niger (b) 295.77 10.00 305.77 Peru (b) 1.72 0.14 1.86 Portugal (b) 1.45 0.00 1.45 Somalia (a)(b) 0.00 340 3.40 South Africa (k) 51.80 30.80 82.60 Spain (I) 0.00 9.00 9.00 Sweden (m) 1.00 5.30 6.30 United States (n) 0.00 000 0.00 Vietnam (e) 0.00 020 0 20 Yugoslavia (o) 0.00 5.00 5.00 Zaire (b)(h) 1.70 0.00 1.70

TOTAL (rounded) 914 344 1258 TOTAL (adjusted) (p) 791 335 1126

(a) OECD(NEA)/IAEA:"Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1979). (b) In situ resources (c) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1990) (d) Equivalent to recoverable resources. (e) No information on recoverability available. (f) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1986). (g) In the Mecsek deposit. (h) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1988). (i) In black shales. 0) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1982). (k) As of 1.1.1989. (I) As mineable resources. (m) In deposits other than Ransiad. (n) Estimate not separated into EAR-! and \R-II, listed under EAR-II. (o) In the Zirovski Vrh deposit. (p) To account for estimated mining and milling losses, not incorporated in certain estimates.

24 Table 3. Other Known Resources (a) (in 1000 tonnes U as of 1st January 1991)

COUNTRY Cost Ranges TOTAL

upto$80/kgU $80-130/kgU upto$130/k

Chile (b) _ 023 China (c) — - 51.00 India (d) — — 66.15 Romania (e) - - 2600 USSR (f) 465.00 220.60 68560

(a) Includes resource estimates that are not consistent with standard NEA/IAEA resource terminology or definitions (b) Submitted as EAR-I as in situ resources unatsigned to any cost category (c) Submitted as "defined reserves" unassigned to any cost category and without information on their recoverabrlity (d) Submitted were 50 6101 UasRARand 15 540 tU as EAR-I. unassigned to any cost category and without information on their recoveraoiWy (e) Submitted as 18 0001 UasRARand 8 000 tU as EAR-I. unassigned to any cost category and without information on their recoveraMity (f) Submitted as "known resources" corresponding to the Soviet resource categories B • Ci • C2 as ii: situ resources, recoverable at costs of up to $80 and 80-120/kg U; a portion of these resources are exhausted

B. UNDISCOVERED CONVENTIONAL RESOURCES

This group includes both Estimated Additional Resources - Category II (EAR-II) and Speculative Resources (SR), listed in Tables 4 and 5. However, it is important to emphasize the distinction of these two types of "undiscovered" resources. EAR-II refers to uranium that is expected to occur in well defined geological trends containing known ore deposits or areas of mineralisation with known deposits, while SR refers to uranium that is thought to exist in geologically favourable, relative!) unexplored areas. A higher degree of confidence can be placed in estimates of EAR-II, because oi their proximity to, and/or close association with identified and well delineated deposits.

Estimated Additional Resources - Category II

Estimated Additional Resources - Category II (EAR-II) recoverable at costs of up to $130/kg U are listed in Table 4. * s in previous reports only a few countries have estimated and reported EAR-II. However, there are a number of new submissions including those from Chile, Hungary, Mexico, Vietnam, Yugoslavia and the USSR.

Of the significant uranium resource countries only Argentina, Canada, South Africa, the USSR, and in the past, Gabon estimated and reported EAR-II. Australia docs not estimate EAR-II separately, but includes these resources in SR. The USA docs not separate EAR-I and EAR-II, but reports EAR. For the purpose of this report, it was decided to list the USA's EAR as EAR-II since the large majority of these resources was previously classified in this category (Red Book 1983).

25 Table 4. Estimated Additional Resources - Category II (a)

(in 1000 Tonnes U as of 1st January 1991)

Cost Ranges TOTAL COUNTRY up to S80/kg U $80-130/kgU upto$130/kgU

Argentina (b) 1.57 2.34 3.91 Australia (c) na na na Canada (d) 68.00 122.00 190.00 Chile (e)(f) - - 0.76 Colombia (g) - - 11.00 Gabon (h) 0.00 1.20 120 Germany 250 3.50 6.00 Greece 6.00 000 6.00 Hungary (i) 6.32 7.10 13.42 Mexico 0.00 2.70 2.70 Portugal 1.50 0.00 1.50 South Africa (b)(j) 30.80 37.70 68.50 United Kingdom (g) 0.00 1.00 1.00 United States (d)(k) 861.30 438.30 1299.60 USSR 325.80 175.40 501.20 Vietnam (I) 0.00 0.20 0.20 Yugoslavia (b)(m) 0.00 0.58 0.58

(a) In situ resources. (b) Recoverable resources. (c) A portion of Australia's SR is EAR-II. (d) Mineable resources. (e) No information on cost category available. (I) Includes a portion of Speculative Resources. (g) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Supply and Demand". (Paris, 1990). (h) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resources, Production and Demand", (Paris, 1986). (i) In the Mecsek deposit. 0) As of 1.1.1989. (k) The EIA does not separate EAR as EAR-I and EAR-II. (I) No information on recoverability available. (m) In the ZirovskiVrh deposit.

Major changes from the estimates reported in the 1989 Red Book include Canada, South Africa and the USA. Canada and South Africa decreased their EAR-II recoverable at costs up to $130/kg U from by over 80 000 and b" over 400 000 tonnes U respectively. The USA increased the estimate for the same cost category b; over 750 000 tonnes U.

Speculative Resources

Speculative Resources (SR) in conventional deposits have been estimated and reported by some national authorities.

These national data are compiled in Table 5. Information was provided by over twenty countries on SR recoverable at costs up to $130/kg U and between $130 - 260/kg U. Some countries, including Canada, China and South Africa, reported SR undivided as to cost category, although they arc judged

26 to be within the cost limit of $260/kg U. As mentioned above, a portion of Australia's SR is equivalent to EAR-I1. The USSR reported SR subdivided into three cost categories.

Table 5. Speculative Resources (a)

(in 1000 Tonnes U as of 1st January, 1991)

Cost Ranges Cost Range TOTAL COUNTRY U reassigned up to $130/kgU $130-260AgU upto$260/kgU

Argentina (b) 364 . . 364 Australia (c) 2600 to 3900 - - 2600 to 3900 Canada - - 900 900 China (d) - - 1770 1770 Colombia (d) 217 - - 217 Denmark (d) 50 - 10 60 Germany 15 - - 15 Greece 6 - - 6 India - - 19 19 Italy (b) - • 10 10 Mexico . . 10 10 Peru 26 - - 26 Portugal (d) 5 - - 5 South Africa (e)(f) - - 1113 1113 United Kingdom (d) 1 1 - 2 United States (f) 861 481 - 1342 USSR 500 300(g) - 800 Venezuela (b) - - 163 163 Vietnam (h) 180 - - 180 Zambia (d) - . 35 35 Zimbabwe 25 - - 25

(a) In situ resources. (b) OECD(NEA)/lAEA: Uranium Resources. Production and Demand, Paris, 1986. (c) Includes a considerable portion of EAR-II. (d) OECD(NEA)/lAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1990. (e) As of 1.1.1969. (0 Recoverable resources. (g) Reported as above US$120kg U (h) No information on recover ability available.

C. UNCONVENTIONAL AND BY-PRODUCT RESOURCES

In a few reporting countries, unconventional and by-product sources of uranium are currently being exploited. With the possible exception of marine phosphates, none of these sources are expected to yield large tonnages in the foreseeable future. In some cases where uranium could be produced at lower costs the countries have reported these resources as RAR and EAR-I, while in other cases they have been reported separately as unconventional resources. The data on these resources, however, are incomplete. As the resource categories of most of the unconventional resources arc unavailable, Table 6 lists the resources by their source, irrespective of their cost categories. The more significant resources of this nature, reported in response to the questionnaire, are as follows:

27 Uranium in marine phosphates is the most important source of production from this category. The USA report 14 000 tonnes U in marine phosphates, from which uranium is being recovered (about 1 000 tonnes U in 1990). Morocco reported over 6 million tonnes U in deposits with an average grade of 120 ppm. Egypt, Jordan, Mexico, Peru and Syria also reported significant resources of uranium in phosphates.

Uranium in black shales is reported as conventional RAR and EAR-I recoverable at costs between $80 - 130/kg U and $130 - 260/kg U by the Republic of Korea and Sweden, while Finland listed uranium in black shales as unconventional resource.

Uranium also occurs associated with non-ferrous metal ores. Chile, India and Peru reported resources of this type. In India, uranium is produced as a by-product of copper leaching, while the operation at Bingham Canyon, Utah, USA, where in 1988 about 40 tonnes U were recovered from copper leaching, was terminated in early 1989.

Table 6. Unconventional and By-product Resources (a) in different sources

(in 1000 Tonnes U as of 1st January 1991)

— — COUNTRY Phosphates Non-Ferrous Carbonatites Black Schists, Ores Lignites

Brazil 28.0 13.0 Chile 0.6 4.5 Colombia (b) 20.0 Egypt (b)(c) 60.0 Finland 2 5 3.0 - 9.0 Greece 0.5 4.0 (e) India (d)(e) 2.5 22.9 Jordan (b)(f) 123.4 Mexico 150 0 1.0 Morocco (b) 6526.0 Peru 20.0 0 5 South Africa (9) Syria (b) 80.0 Thailand (h) 0.5-1.5 United States (i) 14.0 Venezuela (d)(f) 42.0

(a) In tHu resource*, unclassified a* to resource category. (b) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resource*. Production and Demand", (Pari*, 1990). (c) Refer* to U contained in Abu Tartur; all deposit* may contain 100 000 tonnes U (d) OECD(NEA)/IAEA: "Uranium Resource*. Production and Demand", (Pari*, 1986). (e) In addition 14 000 tonne* U in monazite placer*. (0 Recoverability not reported. (g) Included in Table 1. (h) Include* U in monazite placer*. (i) A* recoverable resources.

28 In South Africa uranium is produced as a by-product of the recovery of copper and other metals from the Palabora carbonatite complex. The RAR below $80/kg U in this deposit are estimated at about 3 000 tonnes U. Unconventional resources associated with carbonatites are reported by Brazil (13 000 tonnes in Araxa) and Finland (2 500 tonnes in Sokli).

D. RESOURCES IN NON-REPORTING COUNTRIES

This chapter compiles resource information on those countries which did not respond to the questionnaire, but are judged to be important resource countries. Included here are Bulgaria, the Czech and Slovak Federal Republics (CSFR) as far as the information supplements that presented in the previous report, as well as Poland.

The uranium resources of Bulgaria are located in the Balkan Mountains, the Rhodope Massif as well as in the Thrace Basin. 75 per cent of the total resources are in sandstone type deposits, the remainder in vein type deposits [1 ]. The resources estimated in 1989 [2] total 45 000 tonnes U known resources recoverable at up to $130/kg U, of which 15 000 tonnes U are thought to be proven, the remainder are referred to as additional resources.

In the CSFR, which is a very important uranium resource country, the known uranium deposits occurring in the Bohemian Massif belong to the vein (Jachymov, Pribram, Horni Slavkov, Zadni Chodov, Rozna, etc.) and sandstone types (Hamr). The majority of the resources in the vein type deposits has been mined out. According to published sources, the known resources recoverable at up to $130/kg U amount to 145 000 tonnes U, of which 25 000 tonnes U are proven and 120 000 tonnes are referred to as additional [2]. The potential resources are estimated to be 170 000 tonnes U [3].

The uranium resources of Poland belong to the following types: sandstone deposits, vein deposits, intrusive deposits, coal as well as black shales ("Kupferschiefer") [4]. The associated known uranium resources recoverable at costs of below $130/kg U are reported [2] to total 20 000 tonnes U of which 5 000 tonnes are proven.

In addition to these countries, uranium resources are believed to exist in Afghanistan and Mongolia.

References:

[1] SIMOV, S.D., Uranium exploration in Bulgaria - a review. In: Assessment of uranium resources and supply. IAEA-Tecdoc-597, Vienna, 1991. [2] DARDEL, J., Uranium resources in Europe. Paper presented at the IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Uranium Resources and Geology in Europe, Marianske Lazne, 1989. [3] KERSTING, W., Eastern Europe's uranium production capability. Paper presented at the International Uranium Seminar of the U.S. Council for Energy Awareness, San Antonio, Texas, 1990. [41 BANAS, M. and MOCHNACXA, K., Genetic types of uranium mineralization in Poland and their genetic relationships. In: Metallogenesis of Uranium Deposits, IAEA, Vienna, 1989.

29 II. URANIUM EXPLORATION

INTRODUCTION

Total expenditures on uranium exploration in reporting countries in 1989 and 1990 decreased from the 1988 value (Table 7). In terms of constant (1991) US dollars, reported exploration expenditures amounted to $155.9 million in 1989 and to $141.3 million in 1990 as compared with $192.9 million in 1988. While the 1989 total shows a decrease of $37 million or 20 per cent, the 1990 expenditures decreased by over $51 million or 27 per cent when compared with 1988, but declined less by only $14 million or 14 per cent when compared with 1989. Exploration expenditures for 1991 are expected to total about $118 million.

As in previous years, the geographical distribution of the exploration expenditures has been uneven. For example, in 1990, over 85 per cent were spent in the five countries Australia, Canada, France, India and the USA. The balance was spent in seventeen countries, with an average of about $1.1 million per country in constant (1991) dollars.

Exploration expenditures incurred abroad in 1989 and 1990 declined compared with 1988 (Table 8). In terms of constant (1991) dollars, reported expenditures totalled $45 million and $30 million in 1989 and 1990 respectively. When compared with the 1988 expenditures of $56 million the decrease amounts to $11 million or 19 per cent in 1989, but over $26 million or over 46 per cent in 1990. Expected expenditures abroad for 1991 are reported at about $28 million. Countries funding exploration projects outside their territories are essentially those with larger nuclear programmes including France, Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea and the UK.

The trends of both the total and foreign exploration expenditures for reporting countries between 1979 and 1991 are illustrated in Figure II-l.

A. CURRENT ACTIVITIES AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

The main focus of rer~r>t exploration efforts reported for this study is on the search for high grade uranium deposits in established districts and on the development of known deposits. Areas without known deposits received little attention in 1989 and 1990, although there were some indications of increased activities in the Northwest Territories, Canada. This was sparked by a study of the Geological Survey of Canada, wh ch concluded that deposits comparable with the Australian Olympic Dam copper, gold, uranium depesit may be discovered in this area.

30 Table 7. Uranium Exploration Expenditures (Domestic) in Countries Listed a)

(US$ 1000 in year of expenditure)

Expected COUNTRY Pre-1983 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991

Argentina 34342 5700 2015 69 965 87 484 642 478 556 Australia 300000 13000 11000 9000 12000 18000 20360 17460 11780 14000 (c) Bangladesh 283 34 40 43 40 13 NA NA NA NA Belgium 1100 - - 65 85 330 105 NA NA NA Bolivia 9368 ------~ NA Botswana 430 - 210 - - _ - - - NA Brazil 189920 ------Canada 623220 33960 27970 25200 25660 29720 50000 50127 39914 40522 Central African Rep 20000 ------Chile 7560 ~ - -- - - 120 129 82 99 Colombia 23380 150 150 63 79 37 36 40 - - Costa Rica 10 1 .. 250 100 - - - - _ Denmark 4000 200 100 50 - ~ - - - - Ecuador 1405 258 192 200 NA NA NA NA NA IMA Egypt 8571 1574 1250 1050 1072 1213 3123 2688 3108 2410 Finland 12638 665 544 336 304 109 30 47 NA NA France 460880 49320 48580 47740 64026 55143 47020 33046 32472 27742 Gabon 71542 4737 3982 5000 NA NA NA NA NA NA Germany (FRG) 94165 5400 2200 2800 4600 5800 3000 0 0 0 Germany (former GDR) "* •* •• ** •>• •* •• ** 8900 0 Ghana 90 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Greece 8299 1723 1484 1095 810 510 354 540 505 737 Guatemala - -. 580 - 30 - - - - - Hungary NA NA NA NA NA NA 2500 1200 NA NA India 69920 9850 8670 10190 11580 13430 13664 12803 15138 14466 Indonesia 6904 874 170 187 52 229 206 222 365 656 Ireland 6800 - - - .. - - -- - Italy 68000 4000 1000 600 700 760 NA NA NA - Jamaica 30 - - -- .. - - - Japan 5740 580 560 480 760 520 -• -- Jordan - - - - - .. 163 120 83 29 Korea, Rep of 2565 477 3CV 213 81 315 68 75 43 35 Lesotho NA NA 10 6 5 NA NA NA NA NA Madagascar 4287 914 42 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Malaysia 3200 635 705 738 725 665 680 684 NA NA Mali 51235 72 330 - - - Mexico 24910 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA .- Morocco 2500 NA NA 200 28 24 - - Namibia 15522 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Niger 168589 4890 879 2130 5497 4870 4788 4697 1472 1100 Nigeria 6950 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Norway 2780 400 - - - - -. Paraguay 25510 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Peru 3355 21 54 112 189 300 46 15 60 71 Philippines 3162 62 25 25 25 16 16 16 NA NA Portugal 9758 715 705 693 744 798 1210 954 736 585 Somalia 1000 .. - .. - .. .. South Africa 108993 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Spain 103629 10000 7000 382 680 990 1224 1881 2523 3222 Sri Lanka 33 - - - - Sweden 43000 2100 1200 570 - .. Switzerland 3610 126 112 20 Syria 800 .- - - - NA NA NA Thailand 1023 50 65 1966 4477 2716 35 27 27 30 Turkey 13940 2000 1000 1000 1000 1000 403 161 78 NA United Kingdom 2600 .. - - - .. United States 2404100 44200 31300 25200 25100 22000 22100 16900 19200 11400 Uruguay -- 31 52 34 29 27 28 30 NA NA Yugoslavia NA NA 175 175 295 40 70 215 36 NA Zambia NA NA NA NA NA NA 40 41 32 57 Zimbabwe 435 NA 367 583 1261 NA 1429 1064 680 468 - TOTAL b) 5036053 198749 155020 138465 162999 159662 173302 145824 137712 118185 TOTAL ($1991) 258235 194314 168555 193195 183129 192875 155867 141342 118185 -- - .. — .. . . __ — _ .. a) Industry plus government expenditures b) Of available data only c) Secretariat estimate based on supplemental information from Australia " See country report NA Data not available No expenditures reported 31 Table 8 Uranium Exploration Expenditures (Abroad) by Countries Listed

(in US $1000 in year of expenditure)

Expected COUNTRY Pre-1983 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991

Belgium 4000 200 100 100 100 France 454390 28700 18764 15013 17595 14525 7748 9128 5726 5528 Germany 268000 15500 11500 15800 20000 19000 14000 9000 7000 4971 Italy NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 200 Japan 180126 24220 20684 20592 27170 26450 21410 15677 14234 15125 Korea, Rep. of 16384 3295 1177 257 43 5 48 108 158 146 Spain 20400 ------Switzerland 18797 294 340 2570 2400 1005 1000 500 600 1040 UK NA 2875 7402 11854 6705 6761 6406 8006 1950 1038 United States 222260 4680 1830 NA NA NA W 0.0 0.0 NA

TOTAL 1184357 79764 61797 66186 74013 67746 50612 42419 29668 28048 TOTAL ($1991) - 103637 77461 80569 87724 77703 56270 45340 30457 28048

W Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. NA Data not available.

Figure 11-1 Trend in Uranium Exploration Expenditure for Selected Countries *

500 70 .p e 3 60 | 400

* Excludes China, Cuba, USSR \ NIS. and Eastern Europe (i a. Bulgaria, CSFR, Hungary, Romania, former GDR, and Yugoslavia) but includes Taiwan. China

32 In May 1990, Cameco announced the discovery of a high grade uranium deposit at McArthur River in northern Sakatchewan. Resources were estimated to contain over 77 000 tonnes U grading about 3 per cent on average.

Significant events in uranium exploration carried out in selected countries in 1989 and 1990 are summarised below.

In Argentina, the CNEA continued uranium exploration with annual expenditures of about 2 500 million and 5 500 million Australes equivalent to about $500 000 in 1989 and 1990. Regional exploration centred on 3 000 km2 in the Pampean Ranges and included geological and radiometric surface work aimed at a ground check of airborne anomalies discovered in 1982. At the end of 1990, a drilling programme in the Cretaceous basin of Patagonia was started. Its continuation was planned for 1991.

Uranium exploration in Australia between 1988 and 1990 declined from the 1988 high of A$ 26 million to less than A$ 16 million in 1990, or expressed in US$ from over 20 million to less than 12 million. At Kintyre, the exploration and evaluation activities were completed in mid-1989. About 600 m north of Kintyre high grade uranium mineralisation was encountered at the Nerada prospect. Also zones of high grade mineralisation were found in cores drilled in the late 1970s at the Mount Cotton prospect, some 80 km southeast of Kintyre. In the Pine Creek geosyncline, outside the Kakadu National Park, exploration for unconformity-related deposits continued mainly in Amhem Land, Rum Jungle and in the AHamber area, about 120 km southeast of Darwin. Exploration in the Westmoreland (northwestern Queensland) and Pandanus Creek (Northern Territory) areas increased in 1988 and 1989.

Exploration expenditures in Canada incurred both by industry and government agencies in 1989 declined only slightly from Can$ 61 million in 1988 to over Can$ 59 million in 1989 but experienced a more pronounced decrease to Can$ 46 million in 1990. Expressed in LTS$, the trend was similar, declining from US$50 million in 1988 to about 40 million in 1990. For 1991, it was planned to maintain the exploration expenditure level both in Can$ and US$. This development may reflect the lower level of activities in the Cigar Lake and Midwest underground test mines. In addition to the continuing concentrated efforts in the southeastern part of the Athabasca basin, grass-roots exploration near the Gr?Ht Bear Lake, Northwest Territories, was started in the 1989/90 field season, to test a conceptual model developed by the Geological Survey of Canada indicating that Olympic Dam type mineralisation could be found in this area. Across the country, 57 exploration projects were identified in 1989. The ten most active exploration companies spent 99 per cent of the 1989 total expenditure. In May 1990, Cameco as operator of a joint venture (AGIP Resources, Cogema, Uranerz Exploration & Mining) announced the discovery of the P2 North deposit at McArthur River, 70 km northeast of Key Lake. The ore deposit lying in depth of between 500 - 550 m has been drilled out over a strike length of over 2 km. Resources were estimated at over 77 000 tonnes U at an average ore grade of 3 per cent U. The further evaluation of the deposit continues with development timing scheduled to coincide with the depletion of the stockpiled ore at the Key Lake operation.

The Nuclear Materials Authority of Egypt maintained uranium exploration at a steady level during 1989 and 1990. Special emphasis was directed towards the investigation of the four occurrences Wadi Nasieb, Gabal Gattar, El-Missikat and El-Erediya as well as Um Ara. With the exception of Wadi Nasieb, which is hosted in Carbonaceous sediments, the occurrences belong to the vein type and seem related to Pan-African granites. Drilling of the El-Missikat and El-Erediya prospects started in early 1991.

33 In Finland, the Geological Survey terminated uranium exploration in 1989. However, the radiometric mapping of the country continues as part of the national low-altitude airborne geophysical survey.

In France, four uranium mining companies (Cogema, Compagnie Franchise de Mokta (CFM), TOTAL Compagnie Miniere France (TCMF) and the Soci&e" Auxiliaire d'Energie, a subsidiary of EdF) continue to explore actively for uranium both domestically and abroad (Australia, Canada, Spain, USA). In terms of dollars, the exploration expenditures incurred in France seem fairly steady at $33 millions as a result of the trend in the rate of exchange of US dollars into french francs over the period from 1988 to 1990. In reality, however, the expenditures have decreased in local currency from FF 280 million in 1988 to about 176 million in 1990. Planned expenditures for 1991 arc expected to decline funherto about FF 160 miUion or to less than US$28 million. While grass-root activities were severely reduced during this period, exploration concentrated on the mining properties in the northwestern and southern parts of the Massif Central, as well as on those areas, which surround these properties. Expenditure on overseas exploration activities carried out by the French companies increased in 1989 from US$7.7 million in 1988 to over $9 million, but declined in 1990 to US$5.7 million. The projected expenditures for 1991 were at a similar level.

In the western part of Germany, domestic exploration, on which DM 5.5 million or US$3 million had been expended in 1988, ceased in 1989. In the area of the former German Democratic Republic, however, significant uranium exploration activities took place. Between 1988 and 1989 annual expenditures amounted to 175 million East German Marks and 133 million, respectively, while in 1990, the year in which the GDR joined the FRG, the expenditures declined to Marks 45 million (up to 30th June) and to nearly DM 15 million or US$8.9 million (for the remainder of 1990). Foreign exploration, carried out mostly in Australia, Canada and the USA, decreased significantly with expenditures declining from US$14 million in 1988 to 7 million in 1990. The expected 1991 expenditures may decline further to less than US$5 million.

India, through the Atomic Minerals Division (AMD) of the Department of Atomic Energy, increased the exploration expenditures from Rupee 186 million in 1988 to over 260 million in 1990, equivalent to an increase from US$13 to 15 miUion. At this expenditure level, India continues to be one of the countries with the highest exploration expenditures directed at the assurance of the future uranium supply for its nuclear power programme. AMD reported discoveries of uranium deposits in hitherto unexplored geological environments. They included the upper Cretaceous Mahadek sandstone in the State of Meghalaya, the middle Proterozoic limestone of the Cuddapah basin, Andra Pradesh State, as weU as the shear zones in metamorphosed lower Proterozoic basalts and rhyolites in Bodal, Madya Pradesh State. Plans for 1991 call for increasing exploration expenditures in Rupees, but for a slight decrease in US$.

Uranium exploration in Indonesia continued through 1989 at approximately the same level as in 1987-1989. Judging from the exploration expenditure, the activities increased in 1990 relative to the previous years. The bulk of the work was done in the West Kalamantan region, where a drilling programme at the Remaja Hitam sector started in 1989 (12 holes totalling 817 m) and continued in 1990 (135 holes totalling 1433 m). In 1991, a 2500 m drilling programme was planned at Kalan and surroundings.

Japan's uranium exploration is largely carried out by PNC, which after termination of the domestic programme concentrated in foreign projects mainly in Australia and Canada, but also in other countries including China, Niger and Zimbabwe. Exploration expenditures incurred in these foreign projects in 1990 declined by over 33 per cent when compared with 198S.

34 The Republic of Korea carries out both domestic and foreign uranium exploration programmes. The Korea Institute of Energy and Resources (KIER), responsible for the domestic activities, explored the areas of Gongju (uraniferous graphite layers in homfelses) and Munkyeong (uraniferous granites and potassium rich volcanics). The Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) is carrying out foreign exploration mainly in partnership with other international companies. KEPCO's main exploration interests are in Canada (Cigar Lake, Dawn Lake, Henday Lake) and USA (Crow Butte). The Nord Leyou joint venture in Gabon, which had been dormant since 1985 was formally terminated in 1988. In addition, Daewoo has a 1 per cent interest in the Kiggavik joint venture. Northern Territories, Canada.

In Niger, exploration continued at a relatively high level with total expenditures in the US$4 - 5 million through 1989 and decreased then to US$1.5 million in 1990. The main project was the evaluation of the Akola deposit, north of Akouta, by Cominak, through close spaced drilling.

In Spain, exploration continued in 1989 and 1990 with increasing expenditures in the provinces Salamanca, Caceres and Badajoz for Iberian type uranium deposits. In Salamanca, ENUSA concentrated on the surroundings of the Mina Fe, where a number of anomalies and orebodies have been found. They include the deposits Zona D, M - Sageras and Esperanza, where in situ resources of 2 850 tonnes U have been discovered. In the Caceres and Badajoz provinces, 7 500 km2 underlain by Precambrian-Cambrian schists intruded by Hercynian granites are being explored by a joint venture between ENUSA and CISA, Cogema's Spanish subsidiary. In 1991, activities in Salamanca were planned to increase by about 30 per cent and include geophysics and drilling. New areas in eastern Caceres and western Toledo were also to be included in the 1991 programme.

Switzerland continued participating in projects in the Arizona Strip, southwestern USA, with annual expenditures of about $0.5 million in 1989 and 1990, but planned an increase to over $1 million in 1991.

The British Civil Uranium Procurement Organisation of Nuclear Electric, United Kingdom, directed its efforts at upgrading existing properties in Canada ant. Malawi, while the Company ceased its activities in Australia. Accordingly, exploration expenditures, which in 1988/89 and 1989/90 still amounted to $6.4 and $8 million decreased in 1990/91 to $1.9 million. The planned expenditures for 1991/92 were projected to decline further to $1 million.

In the United States the total 1990 expenditures amounted to $19.2 million, of which $17.1 were incurred by industry and the remainder by government organisations. This total is about 14 per cent above the 1989 expenditures of $16.9 million despite the continuing depressed uranium market and the commercial inventories. Planned total expenditures for the year 1991 were expected to decrease by more than 40 per cent to $11.4 million.

In Zimbabwe, Interuran of Germany was actively engaged in exploration of certain areas in the western and northern parts of the country underlain by Karroo sediments. Exploration expenditures decreased, however, from DM 2.5 million in 1988 to DM 1.1 million in 1990, in response to the uranium market. The results were especially positive in an area close to the border with Mozambique, referred to as Kanyemba, where in the Kanyemba-1 ore body 1 800 tonnes U as recoverable resources were outlined. For 1991, exploration expenditures were planned to decline further to about DM 0.5 million, which would be expended mainly for a technical feasibility study and the determination of baseline data for a future environmental impact study.

35 B. EXPLORATION EXPENDITURE TRENDS

Exploration expenditures are largely a function of the uranium market's perception of resource adequacy to meet future expected demand. Such perceptions are reflected in market prices. Historical trends in uranium exploration expenditures in reporting countries are shown in Figure II-1. With uranium oversupply leading to low prices, exploration expenditures likewise remain at low levels. When prices rise sufficiently, with increasing demand, to provide the industry with appropriate expected returns on investment, increased levels of exploration can be expected to follow.

The relationship between exploration expenditures and market prices may also be reflected in a comparison of exploration expenditures and production values. Based on average uranium prices for long term contracts of US$75 and US$55/kg U in 1983 and 1990 respectively, the uranium exploration expenditure remained at about 7 per cent of the production value of these two years.

Between 1983 and 1990, the uranium exploration expenditures in the reporting countries have decreased by over 40 per cent from $241.4 million to $141.3 million in 1991 dollars. Among the important resource countries, the decline was particular severe in the USA, where expenditures have fallen by over 65 per cent. A similar trend can be noted in the development of the exploration expenditures abroad, where decreases in the same period range from 36 per cent in the case of Japan, 55 per cent in the case of Germany to 80 per cent in the case of France.

A few countries with small exploration programmes ceased activities altogether, and many large scale and long-term projects carried out by international companies were terminated, primarily in developing countries. A few other countries have, however, maintained fairly steady efforts (despite some recent reductions) directed at assuring the longer-term internal and/or external needs. Australia, which showed an increasing trend between 1983 and 1988, reported a decline from US$20 million in 1988 to nearly US$12 million in 1990. Canada, despite a reduction in expenditures of about 20 per cent between 1988 and 1990, maintained a fairly steady share of the exploration expenditures of nearly 30 per cent of the total. In France, exploration expenditures have remained high despite some reductions in the reporting period and in 1990 accounted for over 23 per cent of the reported total. India's exploration expenditures in terms of US$ have steadily increased despite the continuing devaluation of its currency, reaching over US$15 million in 1990.

36 III. URANIUM PRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

The historical trend in uranium production for commercial use in nuclear power stations since 1970 is illustrated in Figures III-l and III-2. There are several distinct periods with each characterised by a different growth pattern.

The period from 1965 to 1975 was marked by the transition in a growing number of countries from production for military programmes to production for commercial nuclear power programmes. The level fluctuated between a low of around 15 300 tonnes per year in 1966 to a high of around 20 000 tonnes per year in 1972, which is not large for the time interval considered. The general trend was one of slowly increasing production. Much of the production came from relatively low-grade deposits, many of which were supported by small underground operations. From 1975 to 1980 Western uranium production increased rapidly to an all time high of about 44 200 tonnes U per year in order to match achieved and anticipated rapid development of nuclear power. During this period, two significant new open-pit operations began production (e.g., Rossing and Rabbit Lake) and the development of two very high-grade unconformity type deposits commenced (i.e., Ranger and Key Lake). In addition, in-situ leaching and by-product recovery operations became more common. Between 1980 and 1985, however, total annual uranium production fell by about 9 400 tonnes to 34 900 tonnes U, with much of the drop being accounted for by the USA's producers. From 1985 to 1988, production maintained a reasonably stable level with only minor fluctuations. Over the last few years (notably 1989 and 1990), uranium production has fallen dramatically. There has been a significant decline in North American production, a significant re-structuring and concentration of the production industry, an increasing supply of inventory from a slow down in new reactor construction, cancellation of planned reactor orders, and additional government inventory sales.

A. PRESENT STATUS OF THE PRODUCTION INDUSTRY

The current world uranium production level is about 50 000 tonnes U per year including Eastern Europe, the USSR, and China. Production in the former WOCA countries alone was 28 355 tonnes U/year in 1990, and was expected to decline to about 27 162 tonnes U/year in 1991 (Table 9). Since the 1989 Red Book report, the reported aggregate uranium production for countries outside Eastern Europe, the USSR and China has decreased by over 22 per cent or some 8 000 tonnes U. Further decreases were also expected in 1991. OECD countries, as a whole, were responsible for the largest share (82 per cent) of the production decline. In the OECD, the producers most strongly affected were in North America. Canada and the USA accounted for 5 284 tonnes or

37 Figure 111-1: Historical Uranium Production for Countries Listed

1000 tonnes U/year

ESI France •So. Africa •Gabon •Niger •Namibia •Australia ElCanada •USA

/> tf ^ f> ^ f # ^ f f £

Note: Graphical data is stacked

38 Figure 111-2 World Uranium Production

1000 tonnes U/year

1990 1991 estimated

39 about 65 per cent of the drop in production. Interestingly, the decline in uranium production comes j at a time when the wood's installed nuclear power capacity has reached two consecutive all-time highs. The production decline, therefore, is primarily due to a surplus of supply, depressed uranium prices and the emergence of non-traditional supplies in the market. ':

North America

There has been a significant decline in uranium production in North America during the 1980s and continuing into the 1990s. Canada remained one of the world's principal producers of uranium and the largest producer in the OECD. Canadian output in 1990 was 8 729 tonnes U contained in concentrate despite an overall 29 per cent decline from 1988 levels. The sharpest production declines occurred in the Elliot Lake area, coupled with the 1989 shutdown of the Rabbit Lake mill. Key Lake and Cluff Lake operations were relatively stable in 1989 and 1990.

In the USA, a significant number of facilities were closed or trimmed back resulting in a 1 620 tonnes U (or 32 per cent) decrease in production between 1988 and 1990. Out of 44 mining and milling companies operating in 1980, only 10 were in operation during 1990. Notable projects which were affected include: Chevron's Mt. Taylor underground mine (10 per cent of the former US production); Freeport's Sunshine Bridge operation; Homcstakc's Grant's mill; URI's Kingsvillc Dome operation; and the Malapai in-situ leach operation.

Latin America

Uranium production in Argentina and Brazil has fallen by 91 per cent from a combined total of 160 tonnes U/year in 1988 to just 14 tonnes U/year in 1990. Two small Argentinean production centres at Los Gigantes and La Estela were closed in 1989/90. Brazil's Pocos de Caldas production centre with a capacity of 425 tonnes U/ycar remains essentially on standby.

Western Europe

Uranium production in Western Europe has declined by 1 609 tonnes U/year or 20 per cent since 1988. The largest declines occurred in France (- 16 per cent), Federal Republic of Germany (- 29 per cent), and Portugal (- 36 per cent); while production in Belgium and Spain remained stable but at relatively low levels. In France, the Langognc and Escarpierc uranium mills were shut down in 1990 and 1991 respectively. Uranium production in the eastern portion (i.e., the former GDR) of the Federal Republic of Germany has declined significantly. In 1988 total FRG + GDR production was 3 965 tonnes U but by 1990 this production was only 2 972 tonnes. An even greater decline to 1 207 tonnes was expected in the FRG by the close of 1991. Production by Wismut at Konigslein will cease in 1995 according to recent plans.

Eastern Europe and the USSR

Information on uranium production and production capacity is gradually surfacing for this region of the world, however, significant uncertainties still remain. Significant levels of production in this region probably began in the late 1940s and early 1950s. The production of individual countries was delivered to the USSR first as supply for the weapons programmes and later as raw material for the nuclear energy programmes of the Comccon countries. It is reported that with the exception of Romania, the entire production of the Eastern European countries including the former German Democratic Republic 131 was exported to the USSR.

40 Table 9. Historical Uranium Production

(in Tonnes U)

Total to Expected COUNTRY Pre-1983 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991

Argentina 1144 172 129 126 173 95 142 52 9 2042 60 Australia 18641 3211 (k) 4324 (k) 3206 (k) 4154 (a) 3780 (a) 3532 3655 3530 48033 3700 (b) Belgium (c) 84 45 (k) 40 (k) 37 (k) 41 (a) 44 (a) 43 43 38 415 40 Brazil 366 189 117 115 (b) 115 (b) 0 18 35 5 960 0 Bulgaria •* •• •• ** •• 850 (0 850 (f) 850 (f) 900 (f) •• 900 (b) Canada 154440 7140 (k) 11170 (k) 10880 (k) 11720 (a) 12440 (a) 12393 (d) 11323 (d) 8729 (d) 240235 (d) 8940 China *• •• *• •* •* "• 344 800 (b) 800 (b) *• 800 (b) •a •>• CSFR •• •• •• 3200 (0 2700 (0 2300 (f) 2000 (f) 110000 (b) 2000 (b) Finland 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 Franc* 37820 3271 (k) 3168 (k) 3189 (k) 3248 (a) 3376 (a) 3394 3241 2841 63548 2508 Gabon 14082 1006 918 940 (b) 900 (b) 800 930 870 (b) 700 (b) 21146 700 Germany (e) 184583 4525 4459 4501 4112 4117 3965 3817 2972 217051 1207 (i) Hungary 19370 •• •* • *j " 570 O 576 530 524 21000 440 India (b) 3800 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 5400 230 (b) Japan 58 4 (k) 4 (k) 7 (k) 6 (a) 8 (a) 0 0 0 87 0 Mexico 42 0

SELECTED TOTAL- 709611 36995 38852 34842 37321 36668 3C25 34093 28355 1177300 27162 WORLD TOTAL (b) •• •• *• *)• • * ** 60799 57809 49854 •a> 46264

* Excludes Ctana. USSR, and Eastern Europe (i e. Bulgaria. CSFR. tie former GOR. Hungary. Romania, and Yugoslavia) (e) Inducing uranium producton In »w former GDR i we ec«rr> report tor turtwrtormatcri) No estmaie due (o insufAoent mtarmaton (f) Uranunlne11ule^Jren*mintieNe»lrVc

The USSR maintained the world's largest uranium production capability and actual production in the reporting period covered by this edition of the Red Book. Officials from republics of the CIS reported that 1991 production capability was on the order of 16 500 tonnes U/year. Actual production was reported to be 13 500 tonnes U/year in 1991 and had fallen off slightly from previous years which was indicated to have been in the range of 14 000 to 15 000 tonnes U/year. CIS officials further reported that 1991 actual production was sufficient to meet domestic requirements with several thousand additional tonnes U/year available for export. In 1991, domestic deliveries were specifically 7 500 tonnes U. Another 6 500 tonnes U were exported thus implying a small drawdown of stocks.

These newly released production figures for the USSR are nearly double most previous Western estimates (i.e., 6 000 lo 7 000 tonnes U/ycar). Consequently, the cumulative production in the USSR is now expected to have been substantially higher than previously estimated. Definitive historical data, however, is still lacking. Thus a firm cumulative figure for the USSR could not be reliably reported in this edition of the Red Book. The USSR reported nine production enterprises existing in 1991, although it was unclear whether all were currently operating. The mining enterprises were located in Russia, Kazakstan, Uzbekistan, and Ukraine. Two additional Republics (Tajikistan and Kirghizia), receive their ore from neighbouring Republics and thus have only ore processing plants. Deposits tributary to Ukraine's Zhjoltyc Vody enterprise were reportedly nearly mined out. The capacities of the USSR production centres range from about 400 tonnes U/ycar to 4 000 tonnes U/ycar. Some 22 000 to 24 000 people were indicated to be involved in uranium mining and milling.

Production in Hungary (524 tonnes U/ycar) and Yugoslavia (53 tonnes U/ycar) has declined slightly in the two year period from 1988 to 1990. No quantitative data were officially provided on Bulgaria's actual production. Bulgaria's uranium production capability totals about 1 100 tonnes U/ycar. Recent production was estimated to amount to 1 000 tonnes U in 1987 [3], 800 tonnes in 1990 [ 1 j and an expected 450 tonnes U in 1991 |4|. There is very little information on Romania's uranium production [3|, which is estimated to have been 900 tonnes U in 1988. Current production levels arc expected to be about 250 tonnes U/ycar due to prevailing political and market conditions. No figures were reported for the CSFR or Poland. At the 1991 Joint IAEA-NEA Technical Committee Meeting on Recent Developments in the Field of Uranium, the CSFR confirmed that cumulative production was approximately 110 000 tonnes U; while, the Uranium Institute estimates that 1990-1991 CSFR production is about 2 000 tonnes U/year.

Asia

No updated information was rcpoiled by China for this edition of the Red Book. The Secretariat estimates that Chinese uranium production is currently in the range of about 800 tonnes U/ycar. This is somewhat up from the 344 tonnes U/ycar which was reported officially for 1988. Other estimates are available, such as the Uranium Institute [5| and NUEXCO estimates, which predict production in the range of 1 000 to 1 500 tonnes U/year, and about 1 900 tonnes U/ycar respectively.

42 Africa

Namibia (3 211 tonnes U), South Africa (2 487 tonnes), and Niger (2 831 tonnes) were among the world's top ten uranium producers in 1990. No figures were reported for Gabon, however, the Secretariat estimates its 1990 production at about 700 tonnes U. In South Africa, output declined significantly from 3 800 tonnes in 1988 to 2 487 tonnes in 1990 due to labour strikes and declining grades. A further decline to 1 750 tonnes is expected for 1991. Anglo-American has announced the closure of its Ergo recovery plant; Vaal Reefs announced a 50 per cent cut in its East Uranium plant and Freegold's Joint Metallurgical Scheme was shutdown in 1990.

Oceania

Australia moved up to become the OECD's second largest producer of uranium with 3 530 tonnes U reported for 1990 even though its production remained at essentially 1988 levels. In 1990, production decreased by approximately 10 per cent at the Ranger mine while production at Olympic Dam increased in 1989 and 1990. Current production at Olympic Dam, however, remains significantly below the production centre's capacity.

Ownership and Employment

In recent years there has been significant re-structuring and consolidation of the uranium industry. Three major companies, Camcco Corporation, RTZ Corporation Pic and Compagnic Gtfndrale dcs Matieres Nucldaires (COGEMA) now control a major portion of the world's uranium production. Cameco is active only in Canada while, through subsidiaries, both COGEMA and RTZ have interests in Canada, the United States, Australia, and Africa. At the same time, uranium industry employment in the traditional supplier countries has dropped to record lows.

Canada - In 1990, Cameco sold a one third interest in its Saskatchewan Rabbit Lake operation and associated properties to Uranerz Exploration and Mining Limited. Also, of significance in mid-1991 was Cameco's initial share offering to the public, as their first step toward fuil public ownership. Due to cutbacks in production, as well as to both temporary (i.e., Rabbit Lake and Cluff Mining) and permanent (i.e.. Panel and Quirke) mine closures, employment in Canada's uranium industry fell by almost 50 per cent from its level in 1988.

In Eastern Europe and the USSR, uranium production had certain common features as regards the organisations responsible for uranium. These features included a strict isolation from other industrial sectors to the point that the uranium organisations were completely independent industrial complexes, which included a large number of supporting activities, such as the manufacture of mining machinery, the production and distribution of foodstuffs for the work force, the running of educational and recreational facilities, etc. The size of such workforces is illustrated by the employment figures reported for the SDAG Wismul organisation of the former GDR, which exceeded 25 000 person-years in the late 1980s, compared with annual production levels of just less than 4 (XX) tonnes U/ycar in the same period. In the USSR, all uranium production enterprises were owned by the All-Union Ministry of Atomic Power and Industry (MAPI) as of October 1991. At the lime, there was major uncertainty as to how MAPI would survive the impending break-up of the USSR and as to the type of control it would have over uranium production in the proposed Commonwealth of Independent States.

43 Table 10 illustrates the aggregate breakdown of the ownership of uranium production in 1990 while Table 11 shows the recent declines trend in employment at uranium production facilities as reported. As can be seen, major reductions have occurred in Canada (2 235 person-years), France (813 person-years), Hungary (2 292 person-years), and the USA (800 person-years) during the two year period from 1988 to 1990. While in Australia, employment has declined much less.

Table 10. Ownership of uranium production

DOMESTIC FOREIGN

COUNTRY Government Private Government Private [tU] [%) [tU] [%] [tU] [%1 [tU] [%}

Australia . nil _ 68 . 1 » 31 Canada - 40 - 15 - 7 - 38 Portugal 418 61 238 36 - - - - Unites States - 0 - 68.3 - 3.2 - 28.5

Production Techniques

In response to the declining price of uranium, the mining industries in some countries have been developing lower cost methods for extracting uranium. In the United States, although total production has declined from 1988 to 1990, an increasing proportion of the total production has come from in-situ leaching (ISL) operations. Generally speaking, ISL techniques have lower capital costs than underground and open pit operations. The new Rosita and Crowe Butte ISL projects, which were opened in 1990 and 1991 respectively, are good examples. It has been reported that a growing proportion of production in the USSR (approximately 40 per cent now) was also attributable to ISL techniques.

B. FUTURE PRODUCTION POSSIBILITIES

There are a number of new developments which have the possibility to impact future uranium production significantly. In Canada, there are several potential new production projects in northern Saskatchewan at various stages of development. Two of these projects would extend the productive lives of the Cluff Mining and Rabbit Lake operations. The Midwest, McLean Lake, Cigar Lake, and McArthur River would be new operations. In Australia, following the closure of the Nabarlek mine in 1988, the "three mine policy" (Ranger-Nabarlek-Olympic Dam) was challenged and upheld. The policy was again re-considered as recently as June 1991, and the Labour Party again chose to maintain it. Recently, however, the owners of the Ranger mine have acquired the adjacent, undeveloped Jabiluka uranium deposit which suggests some confidence on the part of the company in being able to develop the prospect in the longer term.

44 Table 11. Employment in Existing Production Centres as Reported

(in Person-Years)

Expected COUNTRY 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991

Argentina 650 630 630 600 590 500 340 250 Australia 480 460 460 460 621 * 484 * 529 * 500 * Belgium 30 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Brazil 780 724 637 579 564 568 521 463 Canada (a) 5810 5333 5080 4825 4730 4280 2495 2400 France 3682 3508 3247 3145 3089 2786 2276 NA Germany (d) 27636 27893 27481 26835 26450 25189 17710 9000 Hungary 7000 7454 7493 7364 7090 6483 4798 2100 Niger 3550 (b) 3552 3541 3295 3243 3203 3023 2557 Portugal 535 519 506 487 460 450 231 80 Spain 325 311 349 348 348 309 309 256 United States 3600 (C) 2450 (C) 2120 (c) 2000 (c) 2140 (c) 1580 (c) 1340 (c) NA Yugoslavia 420 (b) 420 460 470 490 490 440 200

TOTAL 54498 53259 52009 50413 49820 46327 34017 17811 (e)

NA Data not available Secretariat estimate based on supplemental information from Australia (a) Data as of end of year (b) Estimated (c) Employment data shown for 1984 through 1990 are for US uranium exploration, mining, and milling activities (d) Including former GDR (e) Excludes France and United States

There have been a number of recent developments that will unquestionably impact on the development of new uranium projects, probably contributing to longer lead times and higher costs. In Canada, all new uranium projects will be subject to more intensified environmental assessment and public review before they receive regulatory approval. Several proposed projects in Saskatchewan are currently undergoing such a review process. These reviews will also focus on issues related to the eventual decommissioning of the projects and acceptable plans will be a prerequisite for regulatory approval. The challenges associated with decommissioning of major uranium producing areas have been recently illustrated by the issues facing the Wismut enterprise in the former GDR, and by issues related to the pending approval of plans to decommission operations in Canada's Elliot Lake area. In addition, the November, 1990, recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), if adopted by regulatory authorities, could reduce radiation dose limits to workers by approximately 60 per cent and could pose significant technical and economic challenges - particularly for underground mining operations.

Together with the uncertainties about future uranium requirements, the realities of evolving regulatory approval processes will undoubtedly lead to further uncertainties about the timing,

45 availability, and costs of developing new production projects. Such developments suggest the need for uranium prices that are higher than those prevailing in the current marketplace if new capacity is to be brought on line. A recent Canadian study concluded that "only the very best uranium mining projects have a chance of being developed under current market conditions, and that even these can be rendered uneconomic by excessive taxation regimes". It follows that exceptionally good-quality targets will have to be identified to provide the economic justification for continued uranium exploration [6].

C. PROJECTED PRODUCTION CAPABILITIES

To assist in developing an illustration of future uranium availability, member countries were requested to provide a projection of production capability based on EXISTING and COMMITTED production centres, and a second projection which would include PLANNED and PROSPECTIVE production centres. Both projections would be limited to RAR and EAR-I resources which arc recoverable at costs of US$80/kg U or less and which are tributary to the production centres. Additionally, another set of projections was requested in which the production centres would be supported by resources recoverable at costs of US$130/kg U or less.

Table 12 shows the short term projections for EXISTING and COMMITTED production centres (A-columns) and for EXISTING, COMMITTED, PLANNED and PROSPECTIVE production centres (B-columns) for selected countries. The following trends can be noted in the reported data:

a) In 1991, low-cost production capability of EXISTING and COMMITTED production centres would be about 33 037 tonnes U per year. Higher-cost production would only add marginally to the total.

b) By 1995, low-cost production capability would increase to about 37 225 tonnes U per year. PLANNED and PROSPECTIVE centres were expected to add only about 4 000 tonnes (10 per cent) to this total.

c) By 2000, low-cost production from EXISTING and COMMITTED centres was expected to drop to 32 350 tonnes U per year which is slightly below 1990 levels.

d) By 2010, low-cost production from EXISTING and COMMITTED centres was projected to be about 2 (XX) tonnes U/year below current levels.

c) High-cost production capability was expected to increase by about 12 per cent in the five year span between 1990 and 1995. Beyond that it is difficult to predict since data were not available from some major producers.

The largest portion of the decline in low-cost EXISTING and COMMITTED production centres over the next decade was expected to occur in Canada, France, and the United States. Australia expected about a 100 per cent increase during the same lime period.

4(i References:

[ 1 ] MADEL, J., Nuclear fuel trade relationships between the Eastern European countries and the Soviet Union. Paper presented to the Supply, Demand and Trade Committee of the Uranium Institute, Vienna, 1991.

[2] KERSTING, W., Eastern Europe's uranium production capability. Paper presented at the International Uranium Seminar of the U.S. Council for Energy Awareness, San Antonio, Texas, 1990.

[3] DARDEL, J., Uranium resources in Europe. Paper presented at the IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Uranium Resources and Geology in Europe, Marianske Lazne, 1989.

[4) NUEXCO: The uranium industry of Bulgaria. Monthly Report, July 1991.

|5] URANIUM INSTITUTE: Uranium in the New World Market - Supply and Demand 1990-2010, December, 1991.

(6] MACKENZIE, Brian W. et al, Uranium Mining in Canada and Australia: The Impact of Taxation, Centre for Resource Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, May 1991.

47 Table 12. Short term production capability

A: Existing and committed centres B: Existing, committed, planned and prospective centres

(in Tonnes U/year)

1990 1991 1995 2000

COUNTRY A-l A-ll A-l A-ll A-l B-l A-ll B-ll A-l B-l A-ll B-ll

Argentina 120 120 150 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 Australia (c) 4200 4200 4200 4200 5400 5400 5400 5400 8500 8500 8500 8500 Belgium 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 NA NA NA NA Brazil 0 0 0 0 800 800 800 800 1360 1360 1360 1360 Canada (a) 9200 9200 8940 8940 9430 10930 9430 10930 5040 7740 5040 13540 France 3720 3720 3070 3070 1500 1500 3070 3070 0 NA 1000 NA Gabon (b) 1500 1500 700 700 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 -fe. Germany 0 3000 c) 0 1200(f) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oc India (b) 200 200 230 230 200 350 200 350 500 1000 500 1000 Namibia (b) 3500 3500 3000 3000 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 Niger 4300 4300 2960 e) 2960 e) 4300 4300 4300 4300 4300 4300 4300 4300 Pakistan (b) 30 30 30 30 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 South Africa 2500 2500 2500 2500 1900 0 1900 6270 1900 0 1900 8370 Spain 213 213 212 212 850 850 850 850 850 850 850 850 United States 3400 d) NA 7000 7000 7300 11400 7300 18400 4400 7600 4400 16700 Yugoslavia 0 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zimbabwe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 350 0 350 0 350

TOTAL 32928 32630 33037 34537 37225 41075 38795 56265 32350 37200 33350 60470

I: Production capability supported by estimated RAR and EAR-I, as of 1 st January 1991, and recoverable al costs MO/kg U or less. b) Secretariat estimate. II: Production capability supported by estimated RAR and EAR-I, as of 1st January 1991, and recoverable at costs 11307kg U or less. c) Production capability is confined to two mines NA Not applicable d) Actual production. a) f^roductioricaparjility^oiectioiw" above are based c^ resource estimates as of 1/1/91. e) Planned. Production capability for 1980 is approximate, and reflects the temporary closure of the Rabbit Lake ore processing facility. 0 Production originates from the decommissioning of mines Table 12 continued

2005 2010

COUNTRY Al Bl All Bll Al Bl All Bll

Argentina 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 Australia (c) 8500 8500 8500 8500 3400 3400 3400 3400 Belgium NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Brazil 1360 1360 1360 1360 1360 1360 1360 1360 Canada (a) 5040 7740 5040 18140 5040 b) 7740 b) 5040 b) 18140 b) France 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gabon (b) 1500 1500 1500 1500 0 0 0 0 Germany 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 India (b) 700 1250 700 1250 1000 1700 1000 1700 Namibia (b) 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 Niger 4300 4300 4300 4300 4300 4300 4300 4300 Pakistan (b) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 South Africa 1900 0 1900 9320 1900 0 1900 10890 Spain 850 850 850 850 850 850 850 850 United States 2600 4400 2600 10200 2400 3900 2400 6200 Yugoslavia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zimbabwe 0 350 0 350 0 350 0 350

TOTAL 30800 34300 30800 59820 24300 27650 24300 51240 a) Production capability "projections" above are based on resource estimates as of 1/1/91. b) Secretariat estimate. c) Production capabiKty is confined to two mines d) Actual production. e) Planned. IV. URANIUM DEMAND

BACKGROUND

Uranium is an unusual metal in that it has relatively few practical uses other than as a source of energy in nuclear reactors. There is both military use and commercial demand for uranium, however, details on military requirements are not readily available and not covered in this report. On the commercial side, uranium demand is primarily determined by the fuel consumption in nuclear power reactors and by the inventory requirements of the fuel cycle.

Over 5 600 reactor-years of experience have been acquired with uranium fuels in the commercial sector. The estimation of current consumption has accordingly evolved from an art into a science. About 27.3 grams are consumed on the average for every megawatt-hour of electricity generated. Due to this tremendous energy content, nuclear engineers typically monitor and record uranium consumption to the nearest gram. It is safe to say that the current rate of consumption is well known. Future consumption also can be predicted quite reliably over the short term assuming, of course, that reactor performance docs not change significantly and that the future installed nuclear capacity can be ascertained. These topics are addressed in the following sections.

The demand for natural uranium, on the other hand, is fundamentally much more difficult to estimate for a number of reasons. First, the linkage between demand at the mine and demand at the reactor is stretched out over a significant time period. Uranium may take one to three years in the pipeline before it is finally placed as fuel assemblies in a reactor. As a result of this inherent lime lag. inventory requirements are not directly comparable with current installed nuclear capacity. Moreover, projections of demand arc complicated by utility decisions about the si/e of the desired inventories. Such decisions are linked to ever changing market perceptions and supply-demand forecasts rather than to the laws of physics. Current inventory levels arc generally held confidential since there arc relatively few producers of uranium and full disclosure of stock levels may affect commercial competitiveness. Together, these factors make it difficult to predict cither inventory levels or inventor)' demand with any accuracy. What is clear, however, is that the current demand for uranium can be strongly influenced by both preceding historical events as well as by forecasts of future nuclear energy growth.

During the oil crises in the mid and late 1970s, for example, nuclear power programmes were intensified in order to reduce dependency on OPEC oil. In 1975, for example, over 2 000 GWc of installed nuclear capacity was anticipated by the turn of the century according to the "low estimate". With the ordering and start of construction of a large number of nuclear power plants, uranium demand doubled in the 1970s reaching about 30 000 tonnes U per year by 1980. About 244 000 tonnes LJ/ycar were anticipated to meet the needs at the turn of the century. Construction of new production capacity proceeded accordingly. However, during the ensuing economic recession, growth of energy consumption slowed considerably and a number of national nuclear power programmes lo.si their impetus. This led to the development of an over supply situation in the early 1980s and subsequent buildup of uranium inventories. New high-grade uranium discoveries in Canada and the recent entry

50 Figure IV-1 World Nuclear Electricity Generating Capacity 324.5 GWe as of 1st January, 1991 of USSR/CIS and Chinese suppliers into Western markets have also generally increased supply. Accordingly, many consumers began to reduce their inventory requirements. In the USA, utility-owned and government-owned natural uranium stocks have decreased by 25 per cent in the last two years. In some cases, reductions in inventory have actually overshadowed the increases in annual fuel consumption creating a "negative demand" situation. A few utilities have even reversed their traditional consumer role and are selling their inventories or lending it to others while uranium producers are buying it. Overall, the recent changes in uranium inventories have led to the formation of a substantial traders' market in the 1990s. These topics are addressed more thoroughly in Chapter V which focuses on the relationship of supply to demand. The following discussion concerns uranium demand arising from purely reactor-related requirements.

A. CURRENT NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY PROGRAMMES AND REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

World (324 GWe) - Despite some very vocal opposition since its inception, nuclear power has moved on to become an integral part of the world's electricity supply mix. In some countries, it has even become the major source for electricity supply. At the beginning of 1991, there were 423 nuclear power plants operating in the world with a capacity of about 324 GWe (net gigawatts electric) connected to the grid (see Table 13 and Figures IV-1, IV-2 and IV-3). World nuclear electricity generation has grown by 143 per cent over the last decade alone and by 2.5 per cent each year since the last Red Book. Certainly there have been some setbacks in national nuclear programmes as well. The current world capacity is about 100 GWe lower than that which had been forecast in the 1982 Red Book. Still growth has been strong and even since the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, more than 80 new nuclear power units have been brought on line. There were five new construction starts in 1989 making a total of 83 reactors currently under construction at the beginning of 1991. The world cumulative nuclear electricity generation now exceeds 18 000 terawatt-hours and nuclear power plants now produce about 6 per cent of the world's total energy consumption. Clearly, nuclear power is well established and the existing and committed level of nuclear power plant capacity represents a solid base for the uranium industry to prosper over the long term. World annual uranium requirements are currently estimated at about 49 000 tonnes natural uranium equivalent (see Table 14). An increase to about 55 000 tonnes U is expected for 1991. Uranium requirements for the world's 300+ research reactors have not been included in these figures although some research reactors may reach 550 MWt in size. While the world's nuclear capacity and requirements have steadily increased each year, the growth rates within the 25 countries now utilising nuclear power vary considerably. This situation arises due to differences in national policy, reactor types, and regional and local economics.

OECD (264 GWe) - The installed nuclear generating capacity in the OECD countries grew from 256 GWe to about 264 GWe over the period from 1989 to 1990. The countries constituting the OECD now hold more than 80 per cent of the world's nuclear capacity. The increase of 8 GWe represents a 3.2 per cent annual growth rate since the 1989 Red Book. The OECD reactor-related uranium requirements correspondingly grew from about 35 918 tonnes U/year in 1988 to 37 411 tonnes U/year in 1990. Reactor-related uranium requirements in 1991 are estimated to reach 42 413 tonnes U. Outside the OECD, nuclear capacity has also increased since the 1989 Red Book report but not as dramatically. At the beginning of 1991, the non-OECD countries had a net installed nuclear capacity of about 60 GWe and had a total of 57 reactors under construction. In 1989 India, Korea, Mexico, and the USSR connected about 3.7 GWe to the grid. In 1990, the USSR added one more 925 MWc reactor to the grid.

52 Table 13. Installed nuclear generating capacity to 2010 (in MWe)

COUNTRY 198S 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

Argentina 935 940 940 940 940 940 940 1640 1640 (a) 1640 (a) Belgium 5425 5425 5425 5425 542S 5425 5425 5425 5425 5425 Brazil 626 (d) 626 626 626 626 626 626 3110 5600 8100 Bulgaria 2585 (d) 2585 (e) 2585 (a) 3540 (a) 3540 (a) 3540 (a) 3540 (a) 3540 (a) 3540 3540 (a) Canada 11900 13700 14600 15400 15400 15400 15400 15900 19400 22900 CSFR 3264 (d) 3264 (e) 3264 (a) 3264 (a) 3264 (a) 3672 (a) 4080 (a) 6802 (a) 6802 (a) 5986 (a) China 0 (d) 0 <•) 0 (a) 288 (a) 2150 (a) 2150 (a) 2150 (a) 2450 (a) 3650 (a) 5650 (a) Cuba 0 (d) 0 (e) 0 (a) 0 (a) 408 (a) 408 (a) 816 (a) 816 (a) 816 (a) 616 (a) Finland 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 France 52900 55800 56400 57700 59000 58500 60000 65700 70000 (a) 73000 (a) Germany* 22900 22664 22664 22664 22664 22664 22664 25230 25230 25230 (a) Hungary 1645 <<» 1645 <•) 1645 (a) 1645 (a) 1645 (a) 1645 (a) 1645 (a) 1645 (a) 1645 (a) 1645 (a) India 1374 (d) 1374 (•) 1700 (a) 1935 (a) 2170 (a) 2640 (a) 3110 (a) 6110

OECO TOTAL 256028 263981 266881 271881 275981 277781 282581 302891 315791 326753 SELECTED TOTAL (b) 273704 281662 284888 290123 295112 297382 304032 339246 356636 373098 WORLD TOTAL (c) 316060 324461 330537 337965 346799 351377 362295 415256 436S46 474492

Excludes formerGD R (a) Secretariat Estimate (b) Excludes China. Cuba, the USSR \ NIS. and Eastern Europe (i e. Bulgaria. CSFR. Hungary. Romania, former GDR and Yugoslavia): but includes data for Taiwan. China (c) WORLO TOTAL includes the following estimated data tor Taiwan. China WOO MWe (for 1989-1995). and 6900 MWe (lor 2000-2010) (d) IAEA PRIS 4/90 (e) IAEA PRIS 4/91 (f) The Newly Independent States (NIS) include the entire region which was commonly referred to in 1990 as the USSR (including Latvia. Lithuania. Estonia, and the present CIS) Table 14. Annual Reactor Related Uranium Requirements to 2010 (in Tonnes U)

COUNTRY 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

Argentina 100 147 150 148 150 150 150 300 300 (a) 300 (a) Belgium 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 Brazil 110 110 (a) 140 490 540 540 540 1280 1620 1620 Bulgaria 700 (a) 700 (a) 700 (a) 700 (a) 700 (a) 700 (a) 700 (a) 700 (a) 700 (a) 700 (a) Canada 1800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 2100 2300 2600 CSFR 730 (a) 730 (a) 916 (a) 1143 (a) 1333 (a) 1476 (a) 1476 (a) 1476 (a) 1444 (a) 1326 (a) China 0 (a) 0 (a) 50 (a) 330 (a) 330 (a) 330 (a) 370 (a) 520 (a) 550 (a) 850 (a) Cuba 0 (a) 0 (a) 80 (a) 160 (a) 160 (a) 160 (a) 160 (a) 160 (a) 160 (a) 160 (a) Finland 480 572 465 465 465 465 465 455 455 455 France 7200 7200 7300 7600 7700 7800 7900 8600 9000 9400(a) Germany " 3300 3300 3300 3300 3300 3300 3300 3700 3700 3700 (a) Hungary 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 India 220 (a) 220 (a) 255 (-) 290 (a) 325 (a) 400 (a) 470 (a) 920 (a) 1210 (a) 1650 (a) Japan 6600 (c) 6900 7100 7300 7600 7800 8000 9200 12350 (a) 13140 (a) Korea, Rep. of 1040 1158 1233 1766 1396 1570 2157 2098 2098 2098 Mexico 145 (a) 111 120 92 192 204 186 180 180 180 Netherlands 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 85 85 (a) 85 (a) Pakistan 15 (a) 15 (a) 15 (a) 15 (a) 15 (a) 15 (a) 15 (a) 15 (a) 15 (a) 15 (a) Philippines 0 (a) 0 (a) 0 (a) 0 (a) 150 (a) 150 (a) 100 (a) 100 (a) 100 (a) 100 (a) Romania 0 (a) 0 (a) 75 (a) 75 (a) 150 (a) 150 (a) 225 (a) 375 (a) 375 (a) 375 (a) South Africa 270 (a) 270 (a) 270 (a) 270 (a) 270 (a) 270 (a) 270 (a) 270 (a) 270 (a) 270 (a) Spain 1100 1124 1233 971 1301 1100 1498 1243 1243 1243 Sweden 1400 1400 1500 1500 150T 1500 1500 1500 (a) 1500 (a) 1230 (a) Switzerland 529 (e) 570 570 570 57( 570 570 570 570 570 (a) Turkey 0 (a) 0 (a) 0 (•) 0 (a) 0 .,) 0 (a) 0 (a) 0 (a) 0 (a) 350 (a) United Kingdom 1900 (a) 2000 2000 2000 2500 2000 1800 1600 1300 500 United States 14500(c) 11400 16000 16000 16000 16000 16000 16200 15300 16400 USSR\NIS (f) 6800 (a) 7000 (a) 7500 (a) 7600 (a) 7800 (a) 8200 (a) 8800 (a) 11500 (a) 11760 (a) 15680 (a) Yugoslavia 102 (a) 102 (a) 102 (a) 102 (a) 102 (a) 102 (a) 102 (a) 102 (a) 102 (a) 102 (a) OECD TOTAL 39854 37411 42413 42651 43881 43480 43978 46203 48753 50623 SELECTED TOTAL (b) ...42694. 4 40342 45596 46672 48019 I 47879 49116 53316 56496 58806 WORLD TOTAL (d) 51446 49294 55289 57052 58714 59117 60S19 67819 71257 77669

" Former GDR not included (a) Secretariat's estimate (b) Excludes China. Cuba, the USSR \ NIS. and Eastern Europe (i e. Bulgaria. CSFR. Hungary, Romania, former GDR and Yugoslavia), but includes data for Taiwan, China (c) Enrichment teed delivenes (d) WORLD TOTAL also includes estimated data for Taiwan, China 940t (for 1989), 9001 (for 1990), 850t (for 1991), 800t (for 1992 to 1995); 1200t (for 1996 to 2010) (e) NEA-IAEA "Uranium Resources. Production and Demand" Pans OECD, 1"^0 (f) The Newly Independent States (NIS) include the entire region which was commonly referred to in 1990 as the USSR (including Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and the present CIS)

T -. • Tt 1 North America (113.7 GWe) - Two additional nuclear reactors (2 GWe) in the United States became operational in 1990 bringing its installed capacity to 100 000 MWe. The U.S. nuclear power programme currently has the largest capacity in the world with nuclear power producing 22 per cent of its net electricity generation. The U.S. Government continues to maintain an open policy toward nuclear power. In November, 1990, the U.S. Department of Energy developed a National Energy Strategy with a goal of certifying Advanced Light Water Reactors by 1995 and having the first new plant operational by the year 2000. Canada also added about 1.8 GWe nuclear to its grid in 1990 which represents about a 15 per cent growth since the last Red Book. Another 1.8 GWe is currently under construction in Canada at the Darlington site. Continued growth is expected although it must be noted that in 1990 the Ontario Provincial government placed a moratorium on planning for new nuclear power plants. Annual reactor-related uranium requirements for North America were about 13 300 tonnes in 1990, and were expected tt reach about 18 000 tonnes U in 2000.

Latin America (2.2 GWe) - In 1989, with the completion of the Laguna Verde-1 reactor, Mexico became the third commercial nuclear power producer in the region. The country's original expectation to build 20 new reactors by the year 2000 has been significantly revised downward. A second unit at Laguna-Verde, however, is expected to come on line in 1993. Nuclear capacity in Argentina and Brazil remained constant in 1989 and 1990. Both countries have reactors under construction which are expected to go on line around the mid-1990s. Cuba is constructing two new reactors (816 MWe total) which are expected to be completed in the mid-1990s as well.

Western Europe (118.8 GWe) - France and Belgium both produce a majority of their electricity from nuclear power having 74 per cent and 60 per cent nuclear shares respectively in 1990. France has installed an additional 5.8 GWe of nuclear capacity since 1988 and had six reactors under construction as of January 1991. With the annexation of the German Democratic Republic in 1990, the Federal Republic of Germany added six nuclear units and about 2.1 GWe nuclear capacity to its grid. However, concerns over the safety of the Soviet VVERs led to the subsequent shutdown of the five units at Greifswald and one unit at Reinsburg. A 1 225 MWe West German reactor was also connected to the grid in 1989. In the United Kingdom, one new reactor was connected to the grid in 1989 and seven additional reactors began commercial operation. Work continues on the Si/cwell B PWR, however, no decisions on additionl capacity are likely to be taken until after 1994. In Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland the installed nuclear capacity has remained essentially constant over the last two year period. Italy and Spain experienced negative growth. In June, 1990, the Italian Government halted construction on all new nuclear power plants and permanently retired its two commercial power plants at Caorso and Trino. The Government of Austria has also abandoned preservation efforts on its Tullnerfeld reactor. The reactor-related uranium requirements for Western Europe in 1990 amounted to about 17 211 tonnes U and were expected to be about the same in 1991.

Eastern Europe and the USSR (42.8 GWe) - In Eastern Europe, significant growth in nuclear power had been projected a few years ago - primarily due to chronic energy shortages and the high transportation costs and environmental impacts associated with fossil fuels. Currently, nuclear power is expected to remain an important constituent of the total energy share but will likely develop into a smaller fraction than previously planned. This is due to acute shortages of available capital as well as some operational safety concerns with older reactors which may require lengthy shutdowns for backfilling. Total nuclear capacity in the USSR was 34 673 MWe as of January, 1991 - the third largest in the world. The government's 1985 five-year plan called for nuclear power to provide 20 per cenl of ihe country's electrical power by 1990, however, actual output was approximately 12 per cent. Public pressure has delayed or stopped nuclear projects totalling over 100 gigawatts. The USSR Government, in 1991, however, remained firmly committed to nuclear power. Despite the Chernobyl

55 disaster in 1986, the USSR continued to maintain the largest construction programme in the world with some 25 reactors (21 GWe) underway. The USSR also hosted a construction start at the Rostov site in 1989. Throughout this decade, nuclear capacity growth in the CIS region is expected to be slow and possibly even negative due to public opposition, shortages of capital and anticipated lengthy outages for plant upgrading. Beyond 2000 however, some government officials anticipate an accelerated growth in nuclear power due to strong energy demand, the availability of newer nuclear plant designs, and the presence of an extremely large domestic nuclear workforce. In 1990 and 1991, spokesmen from the USSR's Ministry of Atomic Power and Industry as well as the Kurchatov Institute informally projected an installed nuclear capacity of 100-150 GWe by the year 2010. The Secretariat, however, estimates that only about 58 to 80 GWe are likely to materialise by that date. In 1989, construction was halted on Poland's only two VVER design reactors. In 1990, construction was also halted on the CSFR's Temelin 3 & 4 VVER reactors. Hungary's four VVER reactors at Paks continued to perform very well with the world's best average life time load factor of about 87 percent. Construction is nearly complete at Bulgaria's 953 MWe Kozloduy-6 reactor and a grid connection is anticipated in 1991. Construction on the 953 MWe Belene-1 reactor, however, was halted in 1990. Construction also continues on Romania's five CANDU reactors (3.1 GWe), all of which are scheduled for completion before the turn of the century. No changes were reported for Yugoslavia's single 632 MWe reactor at Krsko. The total installed nuclear capacity in Eastern Europe (Bulgaria, Hungary, the CSFR, and Yugoslavia) in 1990 totalled 8 126 MWe. The 1990 reactor-related uranium requirements for Eastern Europe are estimated by the Secretariat to be about 1 902 tonnes U; anu about 7 000 tonnes U for the USSR.

Africa (1.8 GWe) - Nuclear capacity has remained at a constant level in Africa since the 1989 Red Book. The region's only two reactors are located in South Africa and have annual re actor-related uranium requirements of about 270 tonnes U/year. A site for a third reactor is currently under review.

Asia (45.1 GWe) - Also since the 1989 Red Book, Japan's nuclear programme continued to exhibit strong growth with nuclear capacity increasing by about 3.5 GWe or 12.5 per cent. The Japanese Government and industry aim to improve the technology of light-water reactors and to develop an indigenous fuel cycle industry. Japan currently has one of the largest nuclear construction programmes in the world with 12 reactors (11 GWe) at various stages of completion. China and the Republic of Korea also have noteworthy nuclear construction programmes underway. In 1989, the Republic of Korea added 920 MWe nuclear to its grid and commenced construction on two new plants of similar capacity. In the 1990s, the Republic of Korea expects to add another 7.5 GWe of nuclear capacity while mainland China expects to add about 2.4 GWe. The Philippines also have a completed but dormant 620 MWe reactor whose future status is uncertain. The total reactor-related uranium requirements for Asia are approximately 16 193 tonnes U/ycar.

Oceania (0 GWe) - Although rich in resources and a major producer of uranium, Australia has no commercial nuclear generating capacity. Australian Government policy prohibits development of further stages of the nuclear fuel cycle at present, thus domestic demand for uranium is not anticipated over the short-term. The Government of New Zealand has similarly instituted a policy prohibiting the development of nuclear power.

56 Figure IV-2 World Installed Nuclear Capacity 324 GWe as of January 1991

Latin America 0.7% No. America 35.0%

W. Europe 36.6%

Asia 13.9%

E. Europe+USSR-MS 13.2%

Figure IV-3 World Annual Uranium Requirements (in Tonnes U as of 1st January, 1991)

Latin America 368

No. America W. Europe 13300 17211

E. Europe+USSR-NIS 8952

57 B. NUCLEAR POWER GROWTH TO 2010, AND PROJECTED RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

Projections

For this edition of the Red Book, a short-term projection to the year 2010 has been adopted for the purpose of estimating future uranium demand. The projection is based on the official responses to a questionnaire from the Member countries of the NEA and the IAEA. In certain cases, the Secretariat has provided an estimate to complete the world perspective where no direct response was given. It should be noted that the projections refer to a country's best estimate for nuclear capacity rather than a high case or a low case. Also, the estimates take into account the appropriate lead times for refining, conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication and site storage. Thus, estimates of reactor-related requirements in a given year are not directly comparable with the installed capacity for that year.

Table 13 also summarises the projected installed nuclear electricity generating capacity on a country by country basis. The current projection shows moderate but steady growth in nuclear capacity out to the year 2010 (see Figure IV-4). The capacity in 2010 will be about 474 GWe which is about 46 per cent above the current capacity. The growth is primarily due to the completion of current construction projects (66 GWe) and addition of about 84 GWe in new capacity. Most existing nuclear capacity is expected to remain on-line until 2010 since the average grid connection date was 1979 and since plant lifetimes in the range of 30 to 50 years appear reasonable. Within this decade it is projected that three to five additional countries will begin to employ nuclear energy for electricity generation: China, Cuba, Romania, and possibly the Philippines and Turkey. Starting in 1991, reactor- related requirements amounting to 55 289 tonnes U are expected to rise by about 1 300 tonnes per year on the average (about 2.5 per cent), reaching 77 669 tonnes U total requirements in the year 2010 (sec Figure IV-5).

Performance outlook

Variances in uranium demand may arise due to changes in the performance of nuclear power plants and fuel cycle facilities even if the installed base capacity remains the same. Annual reactor-related requirements arc calculated using technical factors such as the power output of each reactor (e.g.. capacity factor), the overall thermal efficiency of the plant, the degree of fuel burnup, and the enrichment tails assay. In recent years there has been a general trend toward higher nuclear plant capacity factors in the world. Average capacity factors in 1990 were about 67.8 per cent. This is about 5 per cent higher than those reported in 1985. Capacity factor improvements directly affect uranium requirements since a 5 per cent increase in the factor will result in a 5 per cent increase in uranium consumption. The increase in capacity factors, however, mu ,l be weighed against other improvements in fuel efficiency. About 10-20 per cent less uranium is now used per MW.hr of electricity than ten years ago partly due to improvements in fuel bumup.

In the fuel cycle itself, recycling of recovered plutonium in MOX fuel (and to a lesser extent reprocessed uranium) is becoming common practice in some countries. This situation improves the overall efficiency of the fuel cycle but will not dramatically alter uranium demand in the short term because the quantities implied here arc rather small. Likewise, more highly efficient processing of uranium using the Atomic Vapour Laser Isotope Separation (AVLIS) technology is not expected to significantly affect uranium demand over the short term since large scale deployment is not expected within this time frame and since "optimum" tails assay will be most likely determined by the price of natural uranium.

58 Figure IV-4 Projected Installed Nuclear Electricity Generating Capacity to 2010

500

400 10 •Latin America o •c a Asia I 300 •E. Europe + USSR-NIS a •Africa c DWestem Europe •North America « 200 afflffii <5 100

1969 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2006 2010 Year

Figure IV-5 Projected Annual Reactor-Related Uranium Requirements to 2010

Latin America •Africa •Asia •E. Europe + USSR\NIS •Western Europe • North America •mmmmsmmmmmmm

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year

59 Reactor-related requirements over the short term are fundamentally determined by the installed nuclear capacity. As noted, the majority of the anticipated capacity is already operating, thus short term requirements are fairly predictable. The largest uncertainties arise in the different assumptions about schedules for the construction of nuclear power plants, cancellations, new orders for reactors, and whether or not the life of existing plants can be extended.

Unusually high uranium demand scenarios have not been considered. For example, there is increasing discussion on nuclear energy as a possibility to alleviate C02 discharges to the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels. Environmental awareness has heightened in recent years and proposals for special carbon taxes have surfaced as well. Nevertheless, a substantially new deployment of nuclear reactors for environmental rescue is likely to be a long-term rather than a short-term event.

As can be seen from Figures IV-1, IV-2 and IV-3, the strongest growth in nuclear capacity and uranium requirements is projected to occur in the Asian and Eastern European regions of the world - notably Japan, the Republic of Korea and the Newly Independent States (NIS) of the former USSR. Significantly higher growth rates are technically possible due to a well established nuclear construction base and the availability of several proven designs. However, many developing countries currently lack sufficient resources and infrastructure to move forward with nuclear power. At the same time, other fully capable countries have instituted moratoria on new nuclear construction. There are also increasing difficulties in finding new sites to host generating stations regardless of the type of fuel. As a result, the number of new reactor orders has declined in recent years and many electric utilities are exploring natural gas alternatives which tend to reduce investment uncertainty due to their relatively short construction times. In order to alter the world's projected nuclear growth rate significantly, most experts generally agree that four key obstacles would have to be reduced: 1) public concerns about operational safety; 2) concerns about the disposal of radioactive waste; 3) uncertainty in the licensing and regulatory process; and 4) uncertainty about power plant performance, economics and financial risk.

Despite these obstacles, there appears to be relatively strong agreement among the governments on the need to keep the nuclear option open. Programmes are underway in many nuclear countries with the aim: • to enhance existing operational safety by modernising control rooms and operator aids; to develop safer reactor designs which rely on passive protection features; • to improve the quality of construction and operation; • to improve plant performance and economics; • to reduce regulatory uncertainties and streamline the licensing process; • to shorten nuclear power plant construction periods with modular, prefabricated designs; • to re-evaluate waste disposal programmes and establish high-level repositories; and • to improve public understanding and acceptance of nuclear power.

Thus it is widely expected that countries which have nuclear power programmes in place will continue them throughout the short-term period of this report. No consideration has been given to the hypothetical possibility for the premature closure of all existing reactors in view of the governmental programmes described above. Also, given the current nuclear share of total electricity generation in many countries, a complete phase-out would appear to be a long-term possibility if it materialised at all.

60 Finally, it must be noted that most nuclear countries are currently exploring mechanisms to extend the life of their facilities rather than shortening them. Economic studies in several countries strongly favour component replacement and life extension over the high capital cost alternative of building new capacity - in some cases by factors of more than four to one. Life extension also eliminates the need to locate new sites for electrical generation and transmission facilities. National policies, regulatory requirements, and public acceptance of plant lifetime issues, however, are not yet fully established. In most countries, a 25-30 year life for nuclear plants is assumed for the purpose of economic and tax-related calculations. In France and the USA, some recent studies indicate that technical lifetimes on the order of 50 to 70 years are possible. If reasonable 40 year plant lifetimes can be achieved, only about 7.7 GWe of the world's existing nuclear capacity will face retirement by the year 2010. On the other hand, if only 30 year lifetimes materialise almost 114 GWe will be retired. From these simple calculations it can be seen that national policies affecting nuclear plant lifetimes will have an increasing impact on uranium requirements after the turn of the century given the current rate of new reactor orders.

In summary, no radical growth or decline in the existing installed nuclear generating capacity is forseen for the short term. Rather, a steady, moderate, but nevertheless positive growth in nuclear capacity is expected from now until the year 2010 with corresponding increases in reactor-related natural uranium requirements. If East European and NIS programmes grow as projected, nuclear generating capacity will increase by 150 GWe (46 per cent) by the year 2010 to reach a total of 474 GWe installed in the world. With no growth in Eastern Europe or in the CIS, world capacity is projected to grow by 45 GWe (14 per cent) to reach a total of 369 GWe. Annual reactor-related requirements by the year 2010 are anticipated to reach 77 669 tonnes U.

61 V. URANIUM SUPPLY AND DEMAND RELATIONSHIPS

A. CURRENT TRENDS

1. Production levels versus reactor related requirements

In just 30 years, nuclear power's share of total world electricity generation has risen from less than 1 per cent to about 17 percent. Western world uranium requirements have increased accordingly and are expected to continue increasing at a rate of about 2-3 per cent per year well into the next decade. Despite this growth, however, the uranium market has suffered from oversupply since the late 1970s with surplus inventories accumulating due to delays and cutbacks in reactor construction, and declines in new reactor orders. Reactor-related requirements have increasingly exceeded production since 1985 and the drawdown of excess utility inventories has been slower than expected. Consequently, a significant uranium surplus still overhangs the market.

From 1985 to 1988 inclusive, aggregate requirements of almost 5 000 tonnes U were not covered by production and were presumably taken from inventories. Western uranium production in 1989 was 34 093 tonnes U decreasing to 28 355 tonnes by 1990. Requirements for the same years were about 42 694 tonnes U and 40 342 tonnes U respectively. This means a growing deficit of 8 600 tonnes U (or 19 per cent) in 1989 compared with 12 000 tonnes U (or 30 per cent) in 1990. In total, from 1985 to 1990 inclusive, about 25 000 required tonnes U were not covered by Western uranium production. Figure V-l illustrates the historical and projected relationship of uranium supply and demand.

2. The changing market structure

Uranium's behaviour as a commodity has been historically influenced by its relatively higher level of governmental control, as well as by the fact that just a handful of producers account for the bulk of the world's output. The uranium market remains international in scope, yet 90 per cent of Western world production is accounted for by only eight nations (Canada, the United States, South Africa, Australia, France, Niger, Gabon and Namibia). Although reliable production data is very limited, it would appear that the bulk of Eastern production has come from only three countries (CSFR, GDR and USSR). Indeed with the re-unification of Germany, it has been revealed that GDR production to the end of 1990 was almost 217 000 tonnes U, approaching Canada's total production to the same dale of 240 000 tonnes U. Since the end of the 1970s, the uranium market has passed through substantial structural changes, accompanied by emerging new price formation mechanisms (i.e., new processes by which the market price is set). In earlier days, direct negotiations between producers and end users led primarily to long term contracts at specified prices. Today, the market structure is characterised by:

62 Figure V-1

Historical Uranium Production and Requirements in Selected Countries4

Year

* Excludes: China, Cuba, the USSR\NIS, and Eastern Europe (Bulgaria, CSFR, Hungary, Romania, former GDR, and Yugoslavia) but includes data for Taiwan, China

63 a) increased spot market activities; b) increased trading in the uranium market; c) increased availability of non-traditional supply; d) increasing fungibility of uranium; and e) increased availability of uranium inventories.

Increased spot market activities

In earlier days, direct negotiations between producers and end users led primarily to long term contracts at specified prices. This very secure arrangement was negotiated primarily due to rapid growth projections ior nuclear power, anticipated shortages of low-cost uranium, and the high costs associated with loss of generating capacity. Long term contracts are still the major purchase mechanism in many countries - particularly those having a shortage of energy resources. However in recent years, uranium supply security concerns have diminished and there is a clear trend toward increased short term, spot, and spot related contracts in utility portfolios. Neither the NEA nor the IAEA track market transactions directly and little data on them were reported in this exercise. However, several industry journals are consistent in their reporting of the rising number of spot market activities.

Increased trading in the uranium market

The growing importance of trading can be deduced from the large increase in traders and direct transactions (both sales and purchases) by traders and other intermediaries. In today's market it i:> not unusual to find producers purchasing uranium on the spot market, either from utilities or through intermediaries, as a more cost effective means of fulfilling contract obligations than from production. Figure V-2 aptly illustrates the development of trading in the U.S. uranium concentrates market as of 1990. Traders have also gained an early market lead on uranium production in Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and China by setting up joint-ventures, consultancies, and brokerages. Indeed, some trading companies are becoming actively involved in production itself.

In addition to the increasing percentage of traders within the spot market volume itself has grown considerably in 1989 and 1990 as reported by NUEXCO. The growing influence of trading is also evidenced indirectly by the increasing number of price indicators that are published such as those published by NUEXCO, Nukem, the Uranium Exchange, UPIS (WNFM) and others.

Increasing availability of non-traditional supply

The emergence of China, the USSR/CIS, and various Eastern European countries as suppliers or potentially significant suppliers of uranium has occurred most notably since 1990. This emergence has been accelerated by the new openess of their political regimes and accompanying international political detente, but also by trading companies helping them to enter the Western market. Some trading companies also have been able to gain ground despite a tight market due to their inventiveness in setting up a mix of complex and financially driven transactions to enlarge the availability of uranium from non-traditional sources. These transactions may include loans, sales, and swaps involving both natural and enriched uranium of differing origins and at multiple locations.

64 Figure V-2 Natural Uranium Marketing Activity in the USA during 1990

TOTAL IMPORTS

NET EXCHANGES, SALES t LOANS FBOM UTILITIES TO SUPPLIERS* 6.1

ADJUSTMENT QUANTITY =.2 4

Source: US DOE Energy Information Administration. "Uranium Industry Annual 1990". Washington DC: GPA, 1991.

Increasing availability of uranium stocks and inventories

Another major source of supply comes from the drawdown of inventories. That is, uranium is becoming available from reactor construction projects that were prematurely terminated, from the early retirement of some operating reactors, and from the liquidation of certain government and producer stockpiles (e.g., BMFT, U.S.DOE, and Queensland Mines). Even stockpiles which are not being eliminated may undergo changes in inventory holding which also impact potential supply levels. In Europe and particularly the USA, there have been substantial reductions in the level of uranium inventories which the utilities feel that they need to maintain.

Few countries have provided detailed information on the size of the uranium stocks that arc held by producers, consumers or governments so that the data presented in this report describe only a portion of the total picture (sec Table 15). Utilities in many countries cither hold or have policies that

65 Table 15. Reported uranium stocks

(in Tonnes Natural U Equivalent)

Natural uranium Enriched Depleted Reprocessed stocks in uranium uranium uranium COUNTRY concentrates stocks stocks stocks

Argentina 260 . . . Australia 1900 - - - Finland 600 (a) 465 (b) - - Germany 12432 2500 0 0 Korea, Rep. of 540 300 5 - Netherlands 429 18 825 6 Portugal 656 - - - Sweden - 780 - - United States 56500 29900 NA NA

NA Not applicable. (a) Stocks are located abroad at different processing facilities (conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication). (b) Fresh fuel assemblies stored at the reactor sites.

call for the carrying of the equivalent of one to four years of natural uranium requirements, but have not made relevant data available. For individual countries and utilities, the desired level of inventory depends on several factors including national energy policies, perceived security of supply, extent of diversification and forward coverage provided by existing supply commitments, financial consequences of lost nuclear generation, and inventory carrying costs. Any evaluation of total uranium stocks is therefore subject to considerable uncertainty. However, current total inventories have been variously estimated at around 140 000 tonnes U. This is substantially more than would be needed to cover two years' forward reactor requirements, the target believed to be considered reasonable for many utilities.

Also, as more and more traders become intermediaries, the access to and availability of supply from inventories and non-tradional sources becomes greater. In short, trading activity determines the rate at which these supplies enter the market - and trading activity is increasing.

Increased fungibility of uranium

For a number of reasons there has been an increase in the fungibility of uranium, which has affected uranium trade. On the one hand, there has been a decreasing role of government control over uranium supply and the removal of some sanctions (e.g., concerning the import of uranium from Namibia and South Africa). On the other hand, some strong proponents of mining protectionism have surfaced recently - particularly in response to both depressed uranium prices and the recent Soviet penetrations into Western markets. Nevertheless, in most countries discussions are underway on how to reduce trade barriers. The uranium provision in the U.S.-Canadian Free Trade Agreement is one such example.

66 Changes in trade policies also influence the emergence of distinct markets for different forms of uranium (e.g., U308, natural UF6, and enriched UF6). Demand for these different types, especially UF6, have clearly increased in recent years. If one looks at the total spot market in 1990, nearly 40 per cent of the transactions are attributable to UF6. As another example, the USSR signed a long term contract to deliver enriched UFA to Korea's leading nuclear utility, KEPCO. Some traders are also selling natural and enriched UF6 by deprocessing it into its component parts. Over the long run, these emerging markets may have significant impact on the existing markets for conversion and enrichment services as well.

3. Policy

In North America, the implementation of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Canada and the United States on January 1, 1989 was a particularly significant development. For Canada, the FTA ensures that Canadian uranium will be exempted from any restrictions on the enrichment of foreign uranium that might be imposed under the U.S. Atomic Energy Act. For the United States, the FTA provides for exemptions from the further processing requirement of Canada's uranium export policy, in cases where the Canadian uranium will be converted or enriched or consumed in the United States. Thus, Canadian producers can compete freely with U.S. producers for uranium markets in the United States and U.S. converters can compete freely with Canada's only refiner/converter for the conversion business associated with Canadian uranium exports.

4. Prices

Generally speaking, information is not available on cither spot prices or longer-term prices under individual contracts. Some national and international authorities do, however, make available aggregated price data which reasonably illustrate term contract price trends. Additionally, spot price estimates for immediate or near-term delivery are regularly provided by industry sources such as the Nuclear Exchange Corporation (e.g., the NUEXCO Exchange Value), and others (see Figure V-3).

The decline of spot prices

Analysis of spot market price indicators reveals a certain volatility in spot market prices during the 1980s, together with a steadily declining price. The market is characterised by an increased reliance on the spot market itself. This reliance is seen not only in the increasing number of direct spot transactions but also in the emergence of spot-linked conditions appearing in longer term contracts. The current decline in spot prices and the increasing penetration of spot-linked contracts clearly benefits the uranium consumer in the near term. However, in recent years there has been a correspondingly significant decline in uranium production and closure of several mines as a result. Consequently, the implication may well be a less favorable level ol competition lor the consumer over the longer term.

The continual decline of the spot price is influenced by the general perception that there will be no shortage of uranium on the market in coming years. This perception is strengthened by the perceived availability of new uranium inventories including former military slocks and production from the USSR/CIS. USSR officials have indicated that current production capacity exceeds domestic requirements by several thousand tonnes L/year.

67 Figure V-3 Development of Uranium Prices

120

US-OormalicU

R«p.of Kara*

0 X 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1966 1969 1990 Year

Annual averages of the Nuexco Exchange Value (not weighted by quantity) for 1989 and 1990 were US$26.08/icg U (US$10.03/lb U308) and US$25.37/kg U or US$9.76/lb U308 respectively. By mid 1991, the Exchange Value had reached US$23.90/kg U or US$9.20/lb U308.

Medium & longer term prices of uranium

According to published information the average Australian export prices in 1989 and 1990 were A$ 93.36/kg U (A$ 35.91/lb U308) and A$ 61.06/kg U (A$ 23.48/lb U308), respectively. In Canada, the average price under all export contracts made by Canadian producers for deliveries in 1989 was C$ 74/kg U (US$62.40/kg U or US$24/lb U3Og). The average price for export deliveries in 1990 was C$ 71/kg U (or US$62.40/kg U or US$24/lb U3Og). Spot market sales by Canadian producers in both 1989 and 1990 were less than 1 per cent of total sales volume.

The Republic of Korea reports that the weighted average long-term price of deliveries to its utilities amounted to US$66.43/kg U (US$25.55/lb U308) in 1°89 as compared to US$85.38/kg U in 1988. The average price for 1990 was US$60.84/kg U (US$23.40/lb U308).

In a market survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy in 1991, it was reported that the quantity-weighted average delivered price for the 4 850 tonnes U delivered in 1989 to utilities from domestic suppliers was US$50.86Ag U (US$19.56/lb U30„). The comparable price in 1988 was US$67.99/kg U (US$26.15/lb U3Og) for 4 150 tonnes U. This decrease in the 1989 average delivered price was strongly influenced by the 2 190 tonnes U delivered under spot market contracts signed in

68 1989 al a weighted average price of US$25.77/kg U (US$9.91/lb U308). The corresponding price for domestic uranium delivered in 1990 amounted to US$40.82/kg U (US$15.70/lb U308). The quantity- weighted average delivered price reported by U.S. buyers for imported uranium in 1989 was US$43.55/kg U or US$16.75/lb U3Og for 5 040 tonnes U, down from US$49.48/kg U or US$19.03/lb U3Os paid for actual deliveries in 1988 which amounted to 5 840 tonnes U. Of the 5 040 tonnes U imported in 1989, approximately 73 percent was imported by utilities and 27 percent by suppliers. The corresponding price for uranium imported in 1990 was US$32.66Ag U (US$12.56/lb U308).

According to information from the Euratom Supply Agency natural uranium deliveries made during 1989 and 1990 to the electrical utilities of the European Community amounted to approximately 13 500 and 12 800 tonnes U, respectively. Of these amounts, the deliveries made under spot contracts represent 11.5 and 16.7 per cent in 1989 and 1990. For medium or long term deliveries (i.e., for which the time between the date of the signature and the date of the last delivery exceeds one year) the average prices, weighted by quantity, were:

for 1989: US$76.31/kg U ($29.35/lb U308) for 1990: US$76.43/kg U ($29.39/lb U308)

or

for 1989: ECU 69.25/kg U (ECU 26.63/lb U308) for 1990: ECU 60.00/kg U (ECU 23.08/lb U308)

The average prices, calculated according to the same principles of material delivered under spot contracts were:

inUS$

for 1989: $31.68/kg U ($12.19/lb U308) for 1990: $25.16/kg U ($9.68/lb U308)

in ECU

for 1989: ECU 28.75/kg U or ECU 11.04/lb U308 for 1990: ECU 19.75/kg U or ECU 7.60/lb U308

B. OUTLOOK TO 2010

Uranium demand over the short term is fundamentally determined by nuclear capacity and the availability from, or reqrirements for, inventories. Since the majority of nuclear capacity is already operating, with only a small uncertainty due to that under construction and that which is planned, it may be supposed that short-term requirements are fairly predictable. Although there arc operational factors that can impact requirements over this period, such as load factors, plutonium recyclc/MOX fuel, and bum-up, they are not likely to have a major impact. Further uncertainties could be introduced by changes in utility inventory policies. In short, reactor related uranium requirements are rising and

69 are expected to continue rising from their current level of about 49 000 tonnes U to about 77 000 tonnes U per year by the year 2010. The tendency for utilities to maintain high inventory levels is expected to continue to decline over the near term due to the potential availability of uranium from military stocks.

On the supply side, the uncertainties are not so much related to the level of future supply but more to where these supplies will come from. The level of supply from Southern Africa, the future of the three-mine policy in Australia, the results of underground test-mining programmes in northern Saskatchewan, the possibility of reactivating capacity now on stand-by (especially in the USA), and ,. * extent of the penetration of the Western market by China, the CIS and other potential suppliers will .i have an influence.

The continued downward pressure on prices, the expiry of high-priced long term "rontracts, and the availability of new sources of supply have caused some existing producers to close or curtail their operations. This is likely to continue through the mid-1990s, restricting the prospects for market recovery in the short term.

As shown in Figure V-4, production capability for selected countries based on EXISTING, COMMITTED, PLANNED and PROSPECTIVE production centres, and supported by low-cost resources only could be brought from the current level to around 41 000 tonnes U per year within a short time. This would be insufficient to cover the expected reactor requirements in 1995 of some 49 000 tonnes U per year. The gap would widen to the year 2010 as requirements increase and production capability decreases.

Production capability supported by additional higher-cost resources at up to $130/kg U could be boosted to around 56 000 tonnes U per year by 1995. Capability could still approach 60 000 tonnes U per year in 2000 and almost the same in 2010, a level that would be more or less sufficient to satisfy expected requirements at that time. So even for the year 2005, assuming all planned and prospective production centres are developed, no serious production shortfall from low and high-cost resources is expected. Nevertheless, it should be recognised that further low-cost resources could become available v \iiin this timeframe, as a result of technical developments or policy changes in certain countries.

Accordingly, over the near term, power plant operators arc expected to meet a significant portion of their requirements by continuing the drawdown of inventories. Actual production of uranium is expected to remain below capacity and below reactor requirements until the mid to late 1990s when it is estimated that the desired inventory levels are reached. Towards the end of the century, it is expected that supply and demand will be more in balance with the need for new production to be brought on stream to meet an increasing demand.

Another development that may have major impact on the short term uranium supply-demand relationship is the potential implementation of new ICRP recommendations that would lower radiation dose limits to radiation workers3. The dose limit reductions are almost certain to affect the uranium

3. fn November I9'X), the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) recommended new general guidelines for the protection of workers and the public at large. This recommendation is referred to as ICRP 60. As compared io the previous general recommendation fICRP 26) published in 1977, the radiation risk estimates have been revised upwards, leading the ICRP to recommend significantly reduced (60%) dose limits for occupational and public exposure: (a) Occupational effective dose: from 50 mSv/a to 20 mSv/a averaged over 5 years, or with a further provision that the effective dose should not exceed 50 mSv in any single year; and (b) Public effective dose: revised from 5 mSv/a and a lifetime average dose of 1 mSv/a, to just 1 mSv/a and in special circumstances higher values provided the average over 5 years is 1 mSv/a.

70 Figure V-4

Short Term Annual Uranium Production Capability for Selected Countries* (supported by resources recoverable at costs up to $80 /kg U)

70

60

REACTOR REQUIREMENTS •

50

PLANNED + PROSPECTIVE PRODUCTION

* Excludes China, Cuba, USSRVMIS, and Eastern Europe (i.e., Bulgaria, CSFR, Hungary, Romania, former QDR, and Yugoslavia) but includes Taiwan, China

71 industry'1. Some new high grade underground operations may have particular difficulty in meeting the new dose limits if they are adopted by the regulators. Of course, remedial actions are available to the producers to lower the intake of radionuclides (e.g., suppression of dust, improved ventilation, improved radiological monitoring and controls over miners, as well as other protective devices). Nevertheless, the remedies (especially ventilation) will add to the production costs of uranium at a time when prices may still be depressed. Finally, it should be noted that the new ICRP recommendations may also serve as an impetus to the development of non-entry mining methods such as the In Situ Leaching projects which are notably in the USA, and reportedly, also in the USSR/CIS.

One of the largest uncertainties of the supply-demand relationship to 2010 is the potential impact on the market of the non-traditional suppliers, particularly the USSR/CIS. Exports of uranium from the USSR over the reporting period have significantly increased supplies available on the spot market in OECD countries. How successful the CIS will be over the remainder of the decade in penetrating the Western uranium market is largely uncertain.

C. THE IMPACT OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS ON THE LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE

For the longer term it is generally believed that reactor requirements and demand will reach closer synchronisation with inventories having been drawn down to desired levels. Concern about longer term security of supply of hydrocarbon fuels, and the heightened awareness that nuclear power plants are environmentally clean with respect to acid rain, global warming, and ozone depiction could contribute to even higher growth in uranium demand over the long term. However, growing interest in protecting the environment and increased public involvement in environmental review processes may also increase the lead times and costs associated with the development of new uranium mining projects.

Beyond the turn of the century, the two factors which will have the greatest impact on the supply/demand balance are expected to be the rate of nuclear power growth and technological developments as described below.

Nuclear power forecasts

Although there are many uncertainties about the future, one fact is clear. World electrical energy use will continue to grow over the next several decades to meet the needs of a rising population and sustained economic growth. Although presently controversial, nuclear power remains one of the safest and most environmentally benign sources of electricity available. Accordingly, even with moratoriums in place, most nations currently favour keeping the nuclear option open - and in particular, keeping open the option to operate existing plants until such a time as even cleaner and safer sources of electricity generation arc developed and put in place. Therefore efforts are underway in many countries to strengthen existing nuclear programmes and to minimise the obstacles to new orders.

Over the longer term, global consumption of electric.) is expected to grow at an annual rate of about 3 per cent, with nuclear-electric generation increasing in the range of 2 per cent or 3 per cent per annum. In OECD countries, for example, nuclear power accounted for about 16.2 per cent of the

4. The typical effective dose of the radiation exposures from a number of uranium mines from different producer countries including, Canada, France, Gabon, Niger, and t'.ie USA range from about 4 mSv to up to 75 mSv/a.

72 total 1990 electricity generation. Nuclear electricity generation in the OECD is expected to continue growing about 2 per cent per year over the long term. In the USA, an improved licensing process for new plant orders, and a license renewal rule to extend the operating lives of existing plants have been put in place. The license renewal provisions would allow current operating plants to extend their lifetime by 20 years. In Germany and other countries, studies have been inititiated to more directly understand and address the public acceptance issues. Finland has requested bids for a new nuclear plant and Sweden has decided to set aside the earlier decision to retire nuclear plants in 1995.

Outside the OECD, there is also cautious but growing support for nuclear power. Indonesia, Thailand, and others are exploring the nuclear option. The closure of Soviet design VVER reactors in CSFR has been proposed, and the former GDR's Griefswald reactors have been retired early as well. Despite these setbacks, however, efforts are under way in Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary to upgrade their plants and keep them running. The NIS also plan to continue a vigorous nuclear programme with construction accelerating after the turn of the century when new ultra-safe designs arc available. The NIS plan to add about 20 GWc nuclear by the turn of the century and another 40 to 90 GWe nuclear above that by the year 2010.

Lastly, growing concerns over climate change have forced a much more critical look at fossil fuels which compete with the nuclear option. A si/eable carbon tax is under consideration for European nations which may further increase the desirability of nuclear power.

Technological developments

In the USA, Japan and France, work continues on the development of the Advanced Vapour Laser Isotope Separation (AVLIS) enrichment technology which is believed to have significant economic advantages over other enrichment technologies. Prototype testing of the U.S. AVLIS system is expected to take place in the early 1990s while the French SILVA prototype is expected around 2000. Commercial introduction of the AVLIS technology is likely to occur in the early part of the next century due to its significant cost advantage over traditional enrichment techniques.

As regards new reactors affecting fuel cycle requirements, there are currently three major efforts underway in Europe, Japan, and the USA to develop Fast Reactors. Due to both technological and economical limitations at present, however, it is doubtful that such reactors will achieve large scale deployment and impact on uranium supply before the middle of the 21st century.

Reprocessing facilities and tandem-cycle reactors such as the PWR-CANDU concept (which re- burns LWR spent fuel in CANDU reactors and thereby reduces CANDU uranium requirements by about 40 per cent) arc currently available technologies which could make noticeable impacts on uranium requirements by the middle of the 21st century assuming they are deployed.

73 VI. NATIONAL REPORTS ON URANIUM EXPLORATION, RESOURCES AND PRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

Part VI of the report presents the national submissions on uranium exploration, resources and production. These reports have been provided by the official government organisations (Annex 2) responsible for the control of nuclear raw materials in their respective countries and the details are the responsibility of the individual organisations concerned. In countries where commercial companies are engaged in exploration, mining and production of uranium, the information is first submitted by these companies to the government of the host country and may then be transmitted to the NEA or the IAEA at the discretion of the government concerned. In certain cases, where an official national report was not submitted or where deemed helpful to the reader, the Secretariat has provided additional commentsor estimates to complete the scope of the Red Book. Where utilised, the Secretariat estimates are clearly indicated.

The Agencies are aware that exploration activities are currently proceeding in a number of other countries which not included in this report. They arc also aware that in some of these countries uranium resources have been identified. It is not believed that the total of these resources would significantly affect the overall conclusions of this report. Nevertheless, both Agencies encourage the governments of these countries to submit an official response to the questionnaire for the 1993 Red Book exercise.

Finally, it should be noted that the national boundaries depicted on these maps are for illustrative purposes and do not necessarily represent the official boundaries recognised by the member countries of the OECD or the member states of the IAEA.

74 • Argentina •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

During 1989/90 the Argentine Atomic Energy Commission (CNEA) continued its uranium exploration activities in different parts of the country.

This work centred in the Pampas mountain region (granitic environment) and included geolo^ic- radiometric mapping over some 3 000 km2 and ground checking of airborne radiometric anomalies detected during the 1982 survey. Some investigations were carried out in sedimentary basins (Neuquina basin, Province of Neuquen, Sierra Pintada, Province of Mendoza, Triassic basin of Mendoza-San Juan). In the continental Cretaceous basin of Patagonia (Province of Rio Negro) a drilling programme totalling some 3 000 meters was initiated towards the end of 1990.

Plans for 1991 include the continuation of the drilling programme in die Cretaceous basin of Patagonia, as well as different geological investigations in the Pampas mountain region and the Sierra Pintada district.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES*

YEAR In Austral InUSS 1988 5 345 000 484 000 1989 227 000 000 642 000 1990 2 498 00O 000 478 000 1991** 5 500 000 000 556 000

* Excluding salaries. ** Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

The resource estimates of the RAR and EAR-I categories, recoverable at costs of below US$130/kg U have been slightly reduced when compared to the previous report. A summary of the current resource position is given in the following table.

75 Argentina

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I) Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to S80/kg U between $80-130/kg U to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U 8 740 2 190 545 1 955

As recoverable resources.

Resources in the EAR-II category, recoverable at costs of below $130/kg U were also re-estimated and are shown in the following table. Speculative Resources, however, were not reported.

ADDITIONAL CONVENTIONAL RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Category II (EAR-II) Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130/kg U 1 570 2 340

As recoverable resources.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

In 1989/90 the two production centres Los Gigantes (June 1989) and La Estela (November 1990) were closed. Their production capacity has been 80 tonnes U/year and 15-20 tonnes U/year respectively. At present, the only operating centre is San Rafael (Province of Mendoza) with a nominal production capacity of 120 tonnes U/year. The production statistic is shown in the following table.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 Conventional mining 1 839 142 52 9 2 042 60

76 Argentina

The ownership of the 1990 uranium production is divided between the Government of Argentina (78 per cent government domestic) and private interests in the La Estela production centre (22 per cent private domestic). The respective production ownership shares are 7 and 2 tonnes U respectively.

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years)

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991 650 630 630 600 590 500 340 250

Production Capability Projections

The short-term production capability projection for Argentina includes the possibility of constructing a new production centre to be operationable in 1991 at Los Colorados, Province of La Rioja, with a nominal capacity of about 30 tonnes U/year. In addition, an expansion of the recovery facilities at San Rafael with a capacity of 300 tonnes U/year is planned approximately for 1995. Under this assumption, the total production capability will amount to 450 tonnes U/year sustained by known resources recoverable at costs of up to $80/kg U, through the year 2000.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

At present, there are two nuclear power plants of the pressurized heavy water moderated and cooled type (PHWR) on grid: Atucha-1 with a net capacity of 340 MW(e) and Embalse with 600 MW(e). Atucha-2, with about 700 MW(e) capacity under construction since 1981, is expected to be connected to the grid in 1996.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

940 940 940 940 940 940 1 640 1 640* 1 640*

Secretariat estimate.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

147 150 148 150 150 150 300 300* 300*

Secretariat estimate.

77 Argentina I Australia

URANIUM STOCKS AND INVENTORIES

The total stocks held at present by the Government amount to 260 tonnes U in concentrates.

• Australia •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Uranium exploration expenditure in Australia decreased from A$ 26 million in 1988 to A$ 22 million in 1989 to A$ 15.7 million in 1990. The number of active uranium exploration projects also decreased from 27 in 1988 to 24 in 1989 and 20 in 1990.

At the Kintyre deposit in the Paterson Province (Western Australia), the program of evaluation drilling and exploration was completed in mid-1989. High grade uranium mineralisation was intersected in drilling at the Nerada prospect located approximately 600 m north of the Kintyrc orebody. This mineralised zone has not been completely tested.

Regional exploration continued over early Proterozoic metascdiments of the Rudall Metamorphic Complex which are the host rocks for the Kintyre orebody.

Re-assaying of old diamond drill core from the Mount Cotton prospect, located 80 km south-east of Kintyre, has revealed zones of high grade uranium mineralisation. This drilling was carried out in the late 1970's to test for copper mineralisation.

Exploration for unconformity - related deposits continued in the Early Protcrozoic mctascdiments of the Pine Creek Gcosyncline, Northern Territory. Activity was restricted to those areas outside the Kakadu National Park. The main areas for uranium exploration were:

- Arnhem Land, within Early Protcrozoic metasediments near the Kombolgic Formation escarpment. - Early Proterozoic sedimentary rocks extending south-south-west from Rum Jungle. - Allamber area, approximately 120 km south-east of Darwin.

Exploration activity increased in the Westmoreland (NW Queensland) and Pandanus Creek (Northern Territory) areas.

78 Australia

URANIUM DEPOSITS AND PROSPECTS IN AUSTRALIA

JABILUKA NABARLEK &? DARWIN, * RANGER RUM JUNGLE A . KOONGARRA S. ALLIGAToVvALLEY

•OOBAGOOMA PANDANUS CREEK ^.WESTMORELAND Cairns JOtfby I MAUREEN Northern I SKAL 0 Ttnrunt Cfttk i Territory VALHALLA. / ANDERSONS LODE •£^0™£ND Mount Isao A MARY KATHLEEN JPort Htdlutd I

. BIGRLYI | D Alict Springs i # MANYINGEE • KINTYRE Queensland • TUREE CREEK 'ANGELA I Western Australia U- LAKE WAY YEELIRRIE * " LAKE MAITLAND South Australia BRISBANE C • THATCHER SOAK

MT PAINTER..BEVERLEY • MULGAROCK OLYMPIC DAM A • GOULDS DAM .HONEYMOON. EAST KALKAROO O Kaljoorln RADIUM HILL £J a Broken Hill

:PERTH New South Wales L 'SYONEV ADELAIDE i \ \ 1 Victoria MELBOURNE >

. Deposit or prospect A Current producer (mine end/or mill) A Former producer

1000 km I HOBART

79 Australia

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC Industry

YEAR In AS InUSS

1988 26 000 000 20 800 000

1989 22 000 000 16 541 000

1990 15 700 000 11 804 500

1991* Not Available Not Available

Expected.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Australia's low cost RAR decreased by 11 000 tonnes U over the period of 2 years ended December 1990. This reduction was due in pan to depletion resulting from production at the Ranger and Olympic Dam operations plus the reclassification of some resources into different cost categories. RAR in the $80 to $130 cost category increased by 2 000 tonnes U.

During this period, Australia's resources in the low cost EAR-I category increased by 2 000 tonnes U and resources in the $80 to $130 EAR-I category decreased by 5 000 tonnes U. These minor changes were the result of reclassification of resources into different cost categories.

Australia's uranium resources in the RAR and EAR-I categories do not include any uranium recoverable as a by-product of the extraction of other minerals. The uranium resources for the Olympic Dam deposit contain co-products of copper, gold and silver.

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to S80/kg U between S80-130/kgU to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U

469 000 60 000 264 000 126 000

(Variable mining and ore processing losses deducted)

80 Australia

In addition to the RAR and EAR-I the government considers that there is a 75 per cent probability that Australia's Speculative Resources exceed 2 600 000 tonnes U and a 50 per cent probability that they exceed 3 900 000 tonnes U.

The Australian Speculative Resources represent estimates of undiscovered deposits and, as such, are the equivalent of EAR-II plus SR as defined in this report. Separate figures for these categories are not available in Australia. Additionally, no unconventional or by-product resources are included in the Australian estimates.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Present Status

During 1989 & 1990, uranium oxide was produced at two mining/milling operations - Ranger and Olympic Dam.

The Ranger operation in the Alligator Rivers area, Northern Territory consists of an open cut mine and concentrating plant. The plant has a production capability of 3 (XX) tonnes L^Os/annum. This capability is determined partly by the average grade of the mineable ore reserves.

The Olympic Dam operation in South Australia consists of an underground mining operation and a metallurgical plant. The metallurgical plant has an annual production capability of 1 900 tonnes U308; 45 000 tonnes copper and associated precious metals.

In February 1991, Western Mining Corp Holdings Ltd announced that $66 million will be spent on an expansion programme at Olympic Dam which will increase production of both copper and uranium. Production of uranium oxide will increase from 1 200 tonnes UjOg/annum to 1 400 tonnes U3Os/annum. Australia's total production capability from existing production centres is 4 900 tonnes U3Os/annum (4 200 tonnes U/annum).

For the calendar year 1990, all production from Ranger (2 455 tonnes U) was from open-cut operations, and all production from Olympic Dam (1 075 tonnes U) was from underground operations.

HISTORICAL URANIUM PRODUCTION (tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991

Conventional Mining 37 316 3 532 3 655 3 530 48 033 NA*

The Secretariat notes that production for 1991 could be estimated in the range of about 3 700 tonnes.

81 Australia

Foreign Ownership

In Australia, operating companies are Australian registered but may be owned by companies with foreign interests.

As of 30 June, 1990, Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) operator of Ranger mine, had 410 million share: on issue of which Australian private interests owned 75 per cent (with Peko Wallsend Ltd. and North Broken Hill Peko Ltd. being the largest shareholders) and foreign private interests held 25 per cent, with major shareholders being Japan Australia Uranium Resources Development Co. Ltd (10 per cent of issued capital), Rheinbraun Australia Pty. Ltd., UG Australia Developments Pty. Ltd., Interuranium Australia Pty. Ltd., and Cogema Australia Pty. Ltd.

The Olympic Dam Mine is a joint venture between Western Mining Corporation Ltd. holding 51 per cent and BP Australia Ltd. (a 100 per cent subsidiary of the UK parent company) holding 49 per cent.

OWNERSHIP OF URANIUM PRODUCTION

DOMESTIC FOREIGN TOTALS

Government Private Government Private

[tU] [%] [tU] [%1 [tU] [tU] [%] [tU] nil 68 1 31

Employment in the Uranium Industry

Employment in Australia's production centres increased substantially after 1987 when the Olympic Dam deposit came on stream. There was a slight decrease following the closure of Nabarlck in 1988. Employment is expected to remain steady at around the current levels over the near term, although some losses may occur as a result of market attrition, multiskilling and award restructuring. Given market conditions there appears little opportunity for output to be expanded significantly.

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years)

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991

460 460 460 1 250* 1 170* 1 183* 1 144*

The officially reported numbers include all Olympic Dam workers engaged in uranium, gold, silver and copper production. If adjusted for strictly uranium related activities, the Secretariat notes that employment could be about 612, 484, 529 and 500 full-time equivalent persons for the years 1988 through 1991 rcspcc'ively.

82 Australia

Future Production Centres

Under an agreement with the Federal Government, Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) could increase Ranger production to 6 000 tonnes U308 per annum, however, this would depend on the economics of the market and the avai'ability of sufficient reserves. Olympic Dam could consider expansion to around 4 000 tonnes U308 per annum, but again the market outlook will dictate any expansions.

ERA recently acquired the Jabiluka deposit from Pancontinental Mining. With approval to mine Jabiluka, there would be ample reserves to move to around 6 000 tonnes U3Os per annum. Nevertheless, any future development of Jabiluka will be dependent on market conditions and Government policy at the time.

The lease containing Jabiluka is contiguous to the Ranger project area. The Jabiluka orebody is currently being reassessed by ERA to evaluate development options. [Note: Ranger's #3 orcbody is currently the subject of a separate feasibility study due to be completed in December 1991). The purchase of Jabiluka concluded a programme by ERA to acquire additional low cost reserves. The mineable reserves at Jabiluka have yet to be finally determined, but studies so far on Jabiluka No. 2 using the same cut off grade as Ranger, show the total measured, indicated, and inferred gco'ogical resource to be 143 000 tonnes of contained U,0..

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

Present Status

Australia has no commercial reactors and no domestic uranium requirements arc foreseen for the period of this study.

URANIUM STOCKS AND INVENTORIES

Status

For reasons of confdc hty, information on producer stocks is not available. The Commonwealth uranium stockpile remains at 1 900 tonnes U.

TOTAL URANIUM STOCKS (Tonnes Natural U-equivalent)

Natural uranium Enriched Depleted Reprocessed Holder stocks in uranium slocks uranium stocks uranium slocks concentrates

Government 1 900

83 Australia

NATIONAL POLICIES

Status

The Australian Government's policy on uranium provides for the continuing operation of the existing production centres at Ranger and Olympic Dam. Production at Nabarlek has ceased.

Policy on Participation of Private and Foreign Companies

Exploration activities in Australia are not governed by any foreign investment restrictions. Foreign investment in uranium production would be limited to any arrangements which might be negotiated within policy guidelines involving the three approved production centres.

Policy on Activities in Foreign Countries

There are no restrictions on private Australian companies operating in foreign countries.

Uranium Export Policy

Under Australian Government policy, exports of uranium are permitted only from certain approved mines, subject to stringent environmental and non-proliferation conditions. This policy was introduced by the Labor Government when it took office in 1983. The policy was reaffirmed by the governing Australian Labor party at its biennial national conference in June 1991. There are currently three approved mines: Nabarlek, Ranger, and Olympic Dam, but production at Nabarlek ceased in 1988.

The Australian Government also requires uranium exports to be at prices which are fair and reasonable, and at least, comparable with those being received by others in the market.

Australia's existing mines have relatively low production costs and could, within current policy guidelines, significantly expand production capacity, when warranted by market conditions.

Responsible National Authorities

Exploration activities are regulated by State and Northern Territory Governments and the relevant Mines Department of each has the responsibility for issuing licenses.

The Commonwealth Departments of Primary Industries and Energy together with the Treasury have the responsibility for the commercial development of Australia's mineral resources, control of mineral exports and foreign investment matters.

84 Australia I Belgium

URANIUM PRICING

Status

Average uranium export prices for Australian uranium have been:

1988 A$ 101.53/kg 1989 A$ 93.36/kg 1990 A$61.06Ag

It should be noted that the 1990 unit value was distorted by one major transaction.

Belgium

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

No exploration efforts were reported by Belgium for the time period covering 1988 through January 1991.

URANIUM RESOURCES

No uranium resources were reported by Belgium.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Belgium reported a production capacity of 45 tonnes U/year from imported phosphates.

85 Belgium

Ownership Structure

There were no changes in the Belgian uranium production ownership structure or uranium production employment sector. The 45 tonnes of uranium production capacity is 100 percent owned by PRAYON RUPEL TECHNOLOGIES (PRT), a private company. The whole production is sold to SYNATOM, the Belgian nuclear fuel cycle company.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991

By-product production 291 43 43 38 415 40

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years)

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991

30 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Future Production

No new uranium production capability is currently foreseen for Belgium during the time period from present to 2010.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

In 1990, the three largest private utilities in Belgium merged to form a single private electric utility named ELECTRABEL. The installed nuclear generating capacity in Belgium is currently 5 425 MWe (net) and is entirely owned by ELECTRABEL. SYNATOM is Belgium's nuclear fuel cylc company, owned 50 per cent by ELECTRABEL and 50 per cent by the state owned NIM-SNI (Nalionalc Investcri ngsm aatschappij).

Nuclear electricity generation accounts for about 65 per cent of Belgium's electricity demand making it the second largest in the world with respect to nuclear share of generation. The capacity represents contributions from seven reactors: Docl-1, Docl-2, Docl-3, Doel-4, Tihange-1, Tihangc-2 and Tihangc-3. The oldest plants, Docl-1 and Docl-2, were placed into commercial service in 1975. Thus, the capacity is not expected to change over the shon-icrm.

86 Belgium

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

5 425 5 425 5 425 5 425 5 425 5 425 5 425 5 425 5 425

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS TO 2010 (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950

URANIUM STOCKS AND INVENTORIES

SYNATOM is holding a strategic U-stockpile of two years requirements. This stock consists of U308, natural UF6 and enriched UF6.

NATIONAL POLICIES

There have been no significant changes in policy since 1988.

PRICES

Information on uranium prices is not available. • Brazil •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities Following the reorganisation of the Brazilean nuclear programme in 1988, the uranium activities were concentrated in a special organisation referred to as Uranio do Brasil S.A.

In the period 1989 - 1990, uranium exploration in Brazil had ceased. Plans for 1991 do not provide for any exploration activities, but include a feasibility study for a project in the northeastern part of the country. Information on planned expenditures is not available.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Brazil reports both conventional and unconventional uranium resources.

The conventional resources are located in the following deposits:

- Pocos de Caldas with the orebodies A, B, E and Agostinho; - Figueira; - Itataia, including the adjoining deposits of Alcantil and Scrrotes Baixos; - Lagoa Real; - Espinharas; and - others including the Quadrilatero Ferrifero, Amorinopolis and Campos Belos deposits.

The resource estimates for these deposits are listed in the following tabic.

URANIUM RESOURCES(Tonne* - AsS U O) F 1ST JANUARY 1991

Reasonably Assured Resources Estimated Additional Resources Deposits (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs up to Recoverable at costs up to USS80/kg U USS80/kg U

P090S dc Caldas 17 000 6000 Figueira 6 000 1 000 Itataia 77 000 44 000 Lagoa Real 52 000 27 000 Espinharas 4000 4000 Others 6 (XX) 12 000

TOTAL 162 000 94 000

As in situ resources.

88 Brazil

The identified unconventional uranium resources are, as shown below hosted in marine phosphates and carbonatites.

UNCONVENTIONAL RESOURCES*

Deposit Location Deposit type Tonnes U Grade Production Centre

Olinda PB phosphate 28 000 120-140 ppm for P205

Araxa MG carbonatite 13 000 80 ppm for Fe-Nb

As in situ resources.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Since 1988 the production centre at Pogos de Caldas, with a design capacity of 425 tonnes U/year is practically on stand-by due to escalated production costs in the current market.

The Po^os de Caldas operation was owned by NUCLEBRAS, a state owned company until 1988, when after the restructuring of the nuclear activities NUCLEBRAS was liquidated and its assets transferred to UrSnio do 3ra»il S.A.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991

Conventional Mining 902 18 35 5 960 0

The ownership of the uranium production is 100 per cent controlled by Industrias Nticleares do Brasil, a state owned company.

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Pepon-Years)

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991

780 724 637 579 564 568 521 463

Future production capabilities of 800 tonnes U/year are planned to be constructed on the Lagoa Real deposit. It is expected that the operation reaches full capacity in 1993. In addition, a further production capability of 560 tonnes U/year is planned to be operationablc in 2000. In both cases, the operation will be sustained by known resources recoverable at costs of up to $80/kg U.

89 Braril

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

Brazil's present uranium requirements for the Ai.gra i nuclear power plant, a 626 MW(e) PWR, amount to about 110 tonnes U/year. Future requirements depend on the tennination of Angra 2, a 1245 MW(e) PWR, under construction since 1976. In addition, there are plans for the construction of a similar plant, referred to as Angra 3, as well as for two additional ones. The installed nuclear generating capacities and the related uranium requirements are detailed in the following tables.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY [MW(c)l

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

626 626 626 626 626 626 3 110 5600 8 100

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

.... • 1991 1994 2010 1990 1992 1993 1995 2000 2005 110* 140 490 540 540 540 1 280 1 620 1 620

Estimate.

Note: The above projections refer to the "probable rcenario" of Elcctrobras' "2010 Plan".

NATIONAL POLICIES

The reorganisation of the nuclear activities in Brazil took place in mid 1988. The fuel cycle related activities, formerly the responsibility of Nuclcbras were transferred to the newly created company Ir.dustrias Nucleares do Brasil (INB), while the relevant R&D activiticd are being conducted by the Commissao Nacional de Energia Nuclear (CNEN), which reporting to the President of the Republic, also has regulatory functions for nuclear matters.

Induslrias Nuclcarcs do Brasil is the holding for several fuel cycle related companies including Uranio do BrasiLNUCLEP responsible for the production of heavy equipment for the nuclear industry, and NUCLEMON, which produces heavy minerals and rare earth minerals.

It is the policy that Brazil's uranium requirements will be mel from Uranio do Brasil's domestic production.

The policy regarding stockpiling of uranium provides for a minimum stock of fertile and fissile material equal to one year forward demand plus a safety margin of 10 per cent.

90 • Bulgaria •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Historical Review

Although uranium occurrences were known at the end of the second world war (pitchblende in Bukhovo and autunite in Streltsha), systematic exploration started 1945 with the co-operation of Soviet geologists who discovered the first uranium deposits in the Bukhovo area. High grade ore was mined there and shipped to the USSR.

In 1946, a joint Soviet - Bulgarian company was founded which operated under Soviet management until 1956. This organis«tion was replaced by the Bulgarian Uranium Company "Rare Metals", headquartered in Bukhovo, close to Sofia. The Bulgarian management and staff of this company was assisted by Soviet consultants. This arrangement ended in 1990.

Systematic exploration started in the early fifties and covered the entire territory with Gciger- Muller airborne surveys. Despite the low sensibility of this method, a number of uranium anomalies were detected. Some of them, including Eleshnitza, Smolian, Planinetz, Partisanska poliana and Beli Iskar developed into deposits.

In addition, radiometric ground surveys were applied over 80 per cent of the national territory, as well as geochemical and geophysical exploration methods.

As a result of these efforts, a total of 35 uranium deposits were discovered between 1945 ard 1990. Some of these, including Bukhovo, Eleshnitza and Momino contain several deposits.

URANIUM RESOURCES

According to their geological setting, the uranium resources arc hosted in vein, sandstone, volcanic and surficial deposit types. The location of the deposits are shown in the attached map.

The vein type deposits totalling 11, arc related to granitic and quartzsyenitc-monzonite intrusive* and occur either at the contacts with the host rocks or in the granites. In some more detail this type includes the following deposits:

- Bukhovo: mineralisation in Ordovician black schists intruded by a quartzsyenite-monzonitc stock and related dykes, total resources 5 000 - 20 000 tonnes U, grade 0.1 - 1.0 per cent U; depleted;

- similar in their geological setting but smaller (500 - 5 000 tonnes U) and in general in the same grade class, arc the deposits Proboinitza, Kurrilo, Gabra, Bialo voda, Kostcnctz, Panisanska poliana (grade plus 1 per cent U), Bcli Iskar, Dospat, Narrctshcn, and Sborishic.

91 Bulgaria

URANIUM DEPOSITS IN BULGARIA

1) Bukhovo 19) Selishte 2) Smolianovtzi 20) Narretshen 3) Proboinitza 21) Smolian 4) Kurrilo 22) Sarnitza 5) Gabra 23) Planinetz 6) Bialo voda 24) Momino 7) Kostenetz 25) Belosem 8) Partisanska poliana 26) Pravoslaven 9) Beli Iskar 27) Haskovo 10) Eleshnitza 28) Marritza 11) Simrtlt 29) Navasen-Troian 12) Senokos 30) Orlov dol 13) Graved 31) Isgrev 14) Igralishte 32) Okop-Tenebo 15) Pripetshen-DeHshevo 33) Sborishte 16) Melnik 34) Sliven 17) Beslet 35) Rosen 18) Dospat

92 Bulgaria

The sandstone type deposits are hosted in Permian, Oligocene and Pliocene sediments, they total fifteen; the most favorable host are Oligocene molasse sediments:

- Eleshnitza, hosted in several horizons within an Oligocene sedimentary pile, is the largest concentration with total resources in the 5 000 - 20 000 tonnes U range; the grade is in the 0.03 - 0.1 per cent U range;

- Momino is a rcM front deposit in the Thrace basin located in Pliocene sediments in 100 -260 m depth, the total resources are in the 5 000 - 20 000 tonnes range at grades between 0.03 and 0.1 percent U;

- the majority of the thirteen remaining sandstone type deposits (Smolianovtzi, Simitli, Gradevo, Pripetshen-Deltshevo, Melnik, Belosem, Pravoslaven, Haskovo, Marritza, Navasen-Troian, Orlov dol, Isgrev, Okop-Tenebo).

The volcanic type, mostly in the form of veins and stockwork, occurs in five deposits related to Miocene (Smolian, Samitza, Planinetz) and Cretaceous volcanics (Sliven, Rosen); in general, the deposits in Miocene volcanics are of higher grade (0.01 - 1.0 per cent U) than those related to Cretaceous volcanics; all volcanic type deposits belong to the small class ranging in size from 500 - 5 000 tonnes U.

The surficial deposit type include the four deposits Igralishte, Senekos, Beslet and Selishte; geologically they are located in river valleys draining granitic terraines; while their tonnage is small (500 - 5 000 tonnes U) the grade is in the 0.1 - 1.0 per cent U range.

A resource estimate according to resource and cost categories is not available for Bulgaria.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

The past production was mined from a number of deposits, a part of them mined out or closed. The depleted deposits include Bukhovo (UG), Partisanska poliana (UG), Beli Iskar (UG), Igralishte (UG + ISL), Melnik (UG), Beslet (UG), Dospat (UG), Selishte (UG + ISL), Narretshen (UG), Samitza (UG), Planinetz (UG), Orlov dol (ISL), Sliven (UG) and Rosen (UG). Closed is the operation at Smolianovtzi.

The current uranium production comes from as number of mines and ISL facilities including Proboinitza (UG), Kurrilo (UG), Bialo voda (UG + ISL), Eleshnitza (UG), Simitli (UG), Senokos (OP), Smolian (UG), Momino (iSL), Belosem (ISL), Pravoslaven (ISL), Haskovo (ISL), Navasen-Troian (ISL), Isgrev (ISL), Okop-Tenebo (ISL), and Sborishte (UG).

Two ore processing plants are in operation in Bukhovo for the vein deposits' ore and the loaded resin from ISL operation, and in Eleshnitza for the sandstone ores.

Quantitative information on the uranium production is not available.

93 Bulgaria I Canada

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

At the end of 1990, there were four nuclear power plants of the VVR 230 PWR type and one of the VVR 320 PWR type operating. Their combined generating capacity totals 2 580 MW(e). In addition, one VVR 320 with a scheduled generating capacity of 953 MW(e) is in construction. These plants are referred to as Kozloduy 1 - 5. The construction of a further plant, Belene 1, has been stopped in 1990.

Based on this data the following projections are made.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY* [MW(c)l

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

2 585 2 585 3 540 3 540 3 540 3 540 3 540 3 540 3 540

Secretarial estimate.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS* (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 700 700 700 700 700 700 700 700 700

Secretariat estimate.

• Canada •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

As in recent years, uranium exploration activity remains concentrated in areas favourable for the occurrence of deposits associated with Protcrozoic unconformities, most notably in the southeastern part of the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan, western pan of the Athabasca Basin in Alberta, and the Thelon Basin in the Northwest Territories, where the objective is to discover deposits of the Key Lake or Cigar Lake type. In 1989, exploration expenditures of some C% 58 million matched those of 1988, due partly to the underground test mining (advanced prc-dcvclopmcnt exploration) programmes

94 Canada at the Cigar Lake and Midwest projects; actual surface (grass-roots) exploration expenditures for uranium in Saskatchewan were down 30 percent in 1989. In 1990, uranium exploration expenditures approached C$ 45 million, with a significant portion of the total recounted for by pre-development underground test work at Cigar Lake in Saskatchewan; grass-roots exploration dropped sharply in 1990.

In 1989, 13 operators managed 57 active projects, in which 30 companies participated; in 1990, about 27 companies participated in 33 active exploration projects, managed by just twelve operators. The ten most active of these in 1990, spending virtually the total C$ 45 million, were, in alphabetical order. Amok Ltd., Cameco Corporation, Cigar Lake Mining Corporation, Cogema Canada Limited, Interuranium Canada Limited, Minatco Ltd., PNC Exploration (Canada) Co. Ltd., Rio Algom Exploration Inc., Uranerz Exploration and Mining Limited (UEM), and Urangesellschaft Canada Limited.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC*

Industry

YEAR In Canadian dollars InUSS 1988 59 000 000 48 000 000 1989 58 000 000 48 000 000 1990 45 000 000 38 000 000 1991** 45 000 000 39 000 000

Government

YEAR In Canadian dollars InUSS 1988 2 100 000 1 710 000 1989 1 300 000 1 100 000 1990 1 500 000 1 280 000 1991** 1600 000 1 380 000

* No data are available on uranium exploration expenditures by Canadian companies abroad. ** Expected.

Of particular interest in the 1989/90 field season was the exploration conducted near Great Bear Lake, Northwest Territories, which was sparked as a result of deposit-origin investigations by the Geological Survey of Canada. This work established a conceptual model indicating that deposits like

95 Canada the Olympic Dam copper, gold, uranium orebody in Australia may be discovered in the area. The 1990/91 field season was highlighted by significant increments in higher-grade uranium resources, most notably in Saskatchewan at the McArthur River and Wolly projects, and in the Northwest Territories along the Kiggavik geological trend. These additions more than compensated for the loss of low-grade resources in 1990 resulting from developments at Elliot Lake, Ontario.

In May 1990, Cameco announced the discovery of a high-grade uranium deposit in northern Saskatchewan at a depth of 500 to 550 m. The P2 North deposit at McArthur River has been drilled along strike for over 2 km. The best intersection returned 47 per cent U across 9 m, but grades up to 65 per cent U have been reported. Resources are estimated to contain over 77 000 tonnes U grading in excess of 3 per cent U on average. The major joint venture partners are Cameco (44 per cent), UEM (29 per cent), AGIP Resources Ltd (10 per cent) and Cogema (6.5 per cent).

URANIUM RESOURCES

Known Conventional Resources (RAR & EAR-I)

The latest annual assessment of Canada's uranium supply capabilities indicated that estimates of "known" domestic uranium resources recoverable at costs of $130/kg U or less remained virtually unchanged as of 1/1/91 at about 440 000 tonnes U compared with 1/1/90. As noted above, additions to resources during 1989 and 1990 have more than offset the loss of resources resulting from both primary production, of over 20 000 tonnes U in 1989/90, and the developments at Elliot Lake, Ontario, including consideration for the closure of Rio Algom Limited's Quirke and Panel mines in mid-1990.

None of the uranium resources referred to or quantified herein are associated with co-product or by-product output of any other mineral of economic importance.

As of January 1, 1991, about 45 per cent of Canada's RAR and EAR-I resources recoverable at prices of $130/kg U or less, and some 60 per cent recoverable at prices of $80/kg U or less, were associated with or tributary to EXISTING and COMMITTED uranium production centres.

Undiscovered Conventional Resources (EAR-II & SR)

New areas favourable for the discovery of uranium resources were examined in the Athabasca Basin, in both Saskatchewan and Alberta, and in the Thelon Basin, Northwest Territories, where deposits associated with Proterozoic unconformities are most likely to occur. Grass-roots exploration activity conducted near Great Bear Lake, Northwest Territories, was sparked as a result of deposit- origin investigations by the Geological Survey of Canada. This work established a conceptual model indicating that deposits like the Olympic Dam copper, gold, uranium orebody in Australia may be discovered in the area.

96 Lanaaa

As noted above, the most promising results were achieved at the McArthur River and Wolly projects in Saskatchewan, and along the Kiggavik trend in the Northwest Territories. These discoveries have all been made in areas with previously estimated prognosticated (EAR-II) resources. In several cases, additional work in 1990/91 has resulted in the transfer of significant tonnages from the EAR-II to the EAR-I category.

Unconventional or By-Product Resources Canada has no unconventional or by-product uranium resources.

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 a) (Tonnes U)

i 1 REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES* ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES* (RAR) Category I (EAR-I) Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to $80/kg U between S80-130/kg U to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U

146 000 68 000 149 000 80 000

* Recoverable resources. [Note: Mining losses of 15-25 per cent and ore processing losses of 3-10 per cent have been deducted.]

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES* - Category II (EAR-II)

Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S<40-l30Ag U

68 000 122 000

* Mineable resources. [Note: Mining losses of 15-25 per cent have been deducted but ore processing losses have not.]

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES*

Recoverable at costs up to $130/kg U Cost Range Unassigned - 900 000**

* In-situ resources. ** $260/kg U or less. [Note: Neither mining losses nor ore processing losses have been deducted.] a) Resources "estimates".

97 Canada

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Status of Production Capability

In 1990, Canada's primary uranium operators were: Denison Mines Limited and Rio Algom Limited at Elliot Lake, Ontario, and Amok Ltd. and Cameco Corporation in the Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan. Uranerz Exploration and Mining Limited (UEM) became a full one-third partner in all Cameco uranium mining operations during 1990; Amok (80 per cent) operates the Cluff Mining partnership with Cameco (20 per cent). Production in Ontario comes exclusively from underground mines, whereas in Saskatchewan production comes from several open-pits and one underground operation. Producers continued to face an uncertain market in 1990, plagued by oversupply and low and volatile prices. As the uranium market weakened further in the year, some Canadian uranium producers trimmed output levels, others purchased uranium on the spot market, and one was forced to close two of its production facilities.

In 1989, Rio Algom continued with redevelopment work at the past-producing [Milliken/Lacnor/NordicJ properties adjoining its Stanlcigh operation, and Denison started mining at its adjoining Canuc property ahead of schedule. However, during 1990 the uranium market deteriorated to the point that Rio Algom was forced to close two of its three Elliot Lake mines (Quirke and Panel) in August, and Denison had to reduce its workforce by about 450 in line with expected cuts in uranium production.

In April 1991, Denison announced that Ontario Hydro had given Notice of Termination of its uranium supply contract, effective January 1,1993, and that Denison would permanently close its Elliot Lake operation upon completion of deliveries under the contract, affecting some 1 (XX) workers. Subsequently, Denison reached an agreement with Ontario Hydro, whereby 1991 and 1992 deliveries will be accelerated, permitting current production and workforce levels to be maintained until closure, probably by mid 1992.

In June 1991, Ontario Hydro announced that it had agreed to continue Rio Algom's current (Stanleigh mine) contract beyond the end of 1993, but only until 1996 as opposed to the original 2020 date; deliveries will be increased between 1992 and 1995, but at a lower price. The arrangement, requiring the addition of up to 75 employees by early 1992 to the 500 now at Stanlcigh, will also permit the company to complete asset disposal and environmental decommissioning activities related to the closure of its Quirke and Panel mines.

The 1991 closure announcements did not come as a complete surprise in view of the 1990 shutdowns by Rio Algom of its Quirkc and Panel operations. By mid-1991, over 2 000 jobs, representing more than 50 per cent of the uranium-producing workforce, have been affected by closures and cutbacks. The population of Elliot Lake has declined from over 16 (XX) two years ago to around 12 500 today.

In Saskatchewan, milling was suspended at Cameco's Rabbit Lake operation in July 1989, due to poor market conditions, and all operations ceased for six weeks in mid-1990. The Collins Bay "B" orcbody was mined out during 1990 and the ore stockpiled at the Rabbit Lake mill. In October 1990, the Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB) renewed the operating licence for Rabbit Lake, and

98 URANIUM DEPOSITS IN CANADA

O UNDER DEVELOPMENT 5 CIGAR LAKE 7 WOLLY PRODUCING 6 MIDWEST 8 KIGGAVIK

1 ELLIOT LAKE OTHER DEPOSITS 2 RABBIT LAKE m (INCL EAGLE POINT) 9 McARTHUR RIVER 15 DISMAL LAKES 3 KEY LAKE 10 AGNEW LAKE* 16 LGT 4 CLUFF LAKE *&& ° ^ 11 BANCROFT* 17 BLIZZARD 12 MAURICE BAY 18 REXSPAR 13 BEAVERLODGE * 19 OTISH MOUNTAINS 20 MAKKOVIK 14 FOND-DU-LAC 21 MILLET BROOK (* PAST PRODUCERS)

\0

SOURCE URANIUM DIVISION. ELECTFIICrTY BRANCH, EMR g Canada

approved an increase in output levels to a maximum of S 400 tonnes U annually. Milling was expected to resume by September 1991, with annual output increased to 4 600 tonnes U by 1996. Having received regulatory approval to proceed with test mining of the Eagle Point, Collins Bay A and D deposits, Cameco had site preparations at Eagle Point well underway in late 1990, with work focussing on construction of a decline.

At Cameco's Key Lake operation, the larger Deilmann pit was prepared for mining in 1989, the Gaertner pit having been depleted. In mid-1990, the operation closed for six weeks due to continued market weakness. However, nominal mill capacity in 1990 was exceeded to compensate for the summer closure of both the Rabbit Lake and Key Lake operations. Mining at Key Lake has been accelerated so that the Deilmann pit can be depleted by 199S for use as a tailings impoundment facility.

In August 1989, Cluff Mining ceased ore processing due to the depressed market, but resumed milling in January 1990 on an alternate-week basis. With mining completed at the Claude pit during 1989, output from the new Dominique-Janine North pit supplemented ore from the Dominique-Peter underground mine, which resumed production in April 1990. Expecting ore depletion at Dominique- Janine North in 1991, Cluff Mining plans to extend the pit southward and at year-end 1990 submitted an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to the AECB for approval.

The premature closure of Rio's Quirke and Panel mines caused production capability from Canada's existing operations to fall more than 15 per cent, and it is unlikely that the remaining resources will be economically recoverable by conventional methods in the foreseeable future. Although the expansion of capacity at Cameco's Rabbit Lake operation has more than offset the Elliot Lake loss, it was uncertain at what rate Cameco would initially resume operating its enlarged facility. Canadian output in 1991 may very well be below capability, as producers continue to avoid the spot market and gear output to their existing contract commitments. At some operations, significantly higher uranium prices would be required to bring production up to full capacity.

Ownership Structure of the Uranium Industry

In July 1990, Cameco sold UEM a one-third interest in its Rabbit Lake operation and associated properties. Cameco and UEM now have identical equity splits (% and VS, respectively) in both the Key Lake and Rabbit Lake operations, although Cameco operates both. In 1988, UEM had acquired a one-third interest in the north part of the Eagle Point deposit from Noranda Exploration Company, Limited.

In November 1990, Minatco Ltd, an affiliate of Total Petroleum of France, announced that it had acquired 100 per cent of the Wolly uranium project in Saskatchewan from joint venture partners Canadian Occidental Petroleum Ltd. and Canadian Nickel Company Limited. The Wolly project is located adjacent to the Rabbit Lake property, and hosts significant uranium mineralisation; Minatco hopes to develop the project for production in the mid-1990s.

In early 1991, PNC Exploration (Canada) Co. Ltd completed transfer of its 15 per cent equity interest in the Midwest Joint Venture [South McMahon Lake] project to the Overseas Uranium Resources Development Corporation (OURD) of Japan.

100 ELLIOT LAKE, ONTARIO, Canada URANIUM PRODUCING DISTRICT

• OPERATING MINE

A PAST PRODUCING MINE A ACCESSED VIA STANLEIGH Q PAST PRODUCING MINE

SOURCE UW4IUM DIVISION. Eucmcrrr BRANCH, EMR

URANIUM DEPOSITS OF THE ATHABASCA BASIN, SASKATCHEWAN

• OPERATING MINE O URANIUM DEPOSIT JJRANIUM CITY A PAST PRODUCING MINE BEAVERLODGE

MeCLEAN LAKE IWOLIV PROJECT)

EAGLE POINT

DAWN LAKE

ATHABASCA SOUTH McMAHON LAKE BASIN (WOWE»T PROJECT)

CIGAR LAKE—O

HORSESHOEP McARTHUR RIVER ~^\ AND RAVEN'/ llflfl. P2 NORTH) / WEST / BEAR RABBIT LAKE AND ALBERTA COLLINS BAY SASKATCHEWAN

KEY LAKE [_ 50 km !

101 Canada

In late May, Cameco Corporation filed a preliminary prospectus to inform the public of its initial share offering, and in June signed an underwriting agreement to sell 9.6 million treasury shares at a price of $12.50 a share. If the offering is fully subscribed, Cameco will then be held 20 per cent by the public, 49.2 per cent by the Saskatchewan Government, and 30.8 per cent by the Government of Canada; should Cameco employees fully exercise their exchange rights under the Employee Share Savings Plan, over 23 per cent of Cameco's common shares will be publicly held. The offering was expected to close in early July.

Ownership of Uranium Production*

• DOMESTIC FOREIGN TOTALS

Covei Timent Pri\-at e Government Private [tUl m [tUl [%1 [tUj \%] [tU| \%] [lUi {%] - 40 - 15 - 7 - 38 - 100.0

Based on production data from company reports filed with the AECB.

Employment in the Uranium Industry

Direct employment at Canada's uranium production centres fell almost 10 per cent in 1989, from over 4 700 to below 4 300 workers. It dropped a further 40 per cent in 1990 to fewer than 2 500 workers, due mainly to the Rio Algom mine closures and Dcni.son workforce reductions at Elliot Lake. Employment should remain at or about this level until the Denison mine closes in 1992.

Future Production Centres

No firm commitments have been made for the start-up of any new production centres beyond those now in operation. Although there arc several projects being developed lor production, ail at different stages, their start-up dales arc contingent on the receipt of the necessary regulatory/environmental approvals and on developments in the international uranium market. These uncertainties, as wcl! as those regarding the costs associated with certain of the planned projects described below, make it difficult to project production capability levels in the future with any precision.

At the Cigar Lake project in Saskatchewan, the 500 m deep shaft, which was started in September 1988, was completed in May 1990; lateral development work is continuing in preparation lor a planned test mining programme. The Cigar Lake deposit, the world's largest and richest, has known geologic resources that total 150 (XX) tonnes U in ore grading 10 per cent U. Test mining and bulk sampling could be completed in 1991 to permit preparation of an EIS and mining feasibility report during 1992.

At the Midwest project in northern Saskatchewan, the results of a year-long test mining programme, completed in October 1989, have been evaluated and an EIS has been prepared. The

102 Canada high-grade section of the deposit reportedly contains 12 500 tonnes U grading over 5 per cent U. Denison (45 per cent) operates the joint venture; the other partners include UEM (20 per cent), Bow Valley Industries Ltd (20 per cent), and OURD (15 per cent).

Cameco's McArthur River discovery [noted abovel, 70 km northeast of Key Lake, contains reported resources exceeding 77 000 tonnes V grading more than 3 per cent V on average. Follow-up evaluation of the deposit continues, with development timing scheduled to coincide with the depletion of stockpiled ore at Key Lake.

Minatco's Wolly project, located adjacent to the Rabbit Lake property, hosts significant uranium mineralisation, including the McClean, Jeb, and Sue deposits. Minatco is continuing exploration and development work at Wolly, and has completed an EIS in preparation for a production decision at McClean by the mid-1990s.

In April 1991, ihe Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources formally implemented an AECB decision to refer six proposals for new uranium mining facilities in Saskatchewan for public review by an independent Panel, pursuant to the federal government's Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP) Guidelines Order. Five will be reviewed by a joint federal-provincial Panel, namely: the expansion of the Cluff Mining operation by developing the South and West Dominique-Janine deposits, the Denison Midwest Joint Venture South McMahon Lake project, the Minatco McClean Lake project, the Cigar Lake Mining project at Cigar Lake, and the Camcco McArthur River project. The sixth proposal, an expansion of Cameco's Rabbit Lake operation by development of the Eagle Point/Collins Bay A & D deposits, will be reviewed by a federal-only Panel, because conditional approval was already granted by Saskatchewan authorities.

!n the Northwest Territories, the Kiggavik project of Urangesellschaft Canada Limited (UCL) had already been referred to an EARP Panel. However, in July 1990, UCL, the principal owner and operator of the project, requested the Panel delay indefinitely its planned environmental assessment hearing for Kiggavik. The company indicated that more time was needed "to respond thoroughly to the request for considerable additional information", resulting from the Panel's earlier identification of deficiencies in its Environmental Assessment Report.

Historical Uranium Production (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990* 1990 1991 Conventional Mining 207 790 12 393** 11 323** 8 729 240 235 8 940

Actual 1990 primary uranium production: 61 per cent from open pit and 39 per cent from underground mines. Primary output. In 1990, an additional 50 tonnes U was recovered by the Elliot Lake producers from Camcco's refinery/conversion facility by-products, compared with about 31 tonnes U in 1989 and 73 tonnes U in 1988. These amount* arc NOT included in Canada's primary uranium production totals.

103 Canada

Employment in Existing Production Centres* (Person-Years)

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991 5 333 5 080 4 825 4 730 4 280 2 495 2 400

Data as of end of year.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

Uranium Requirements

At the end of 1990, 19 CANDU reactors with a combined generating capacity of about 13 000 megawatts electric (MWe) were in service in Canada. During the year, almost 15 per cent of Canada's electric power was nuclear-generated in three provinces; in Ontario it was almost a half, and in New Brunswick nearly a third. Annual reactor-related requirements remain at roughly 2 000 tonnes U/year.

There are no new nuclear power plants scheduled for construction in Canada beyond the completion of the Darlington nuclear power station east of Toronto, Ontario; the last of the four Darlington units is expected to be in service in 1992. In December 1989, Ontario Hydro released its 25-year supply/demand plan which called for the construction of an additional 10 reactors to be built by the year 2014; the plan is currently undergoing environmental review. With the election of a New Democratic Party government in Ontario in September 1990, all work on future nuclear plants has been suspended pending completion of the review.

Supply and Procurement Strategy

In January 1991, Canada's forward commitments under all domestic contracts were approximately 70 000 tonnes U. About two-thirds of Ontario Hydro's requirements has been supplied by the Elliot Lake producers, the balance coming from Saskatchewan. As noted above, however, it was announced in early 1991 that the Elliot Lake contracts will be terminated in 1992 and 1996, respectively, reducing forward domestic commitments to about 7 000 tonnes U.

Installed Nuclear Generating Capacity to 2010"' (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 13 700 14 600 15 400 15 400 15 400 15 400 15 900 19 400 22 900

* Capacity "estimates" as of 1/1/91.

104 Canada

Annual keactor-Related Uranium Requirements to 2010* (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 1900 1 900 1 900 1900 1 900 1900 2 100 2 300 NA

Requirement "estimates" as of 1/1/91.

URANIUM POLICIES

Following the implementation of the Canada/United States Free Trade Agreement (FTA) on January 1, 1989, the Canadian government initiated an overall review of the commercial aspects of Canada's uranium export policy. This review was prompted by a desire to ensure that the policy would facilitate the industry's search for new business opportunities, while maintaining Canada's nuclear non-proliferation and security objectives, and maintaining consistency with Canada's commitments under the GATT and the FTA. A companion objective was to simplify the administration of the policy, and make it easier for Canada's uranium customers to understand.

The results of the review were outlined in a letter from the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources to the Canadian uranium industry, dated May 18, 1990. Canada will continue to monitor domestic security of supply, while relaxing contract requirements. Toward this end, the maximum approval period on export contracts has been extended from 15 years to 30 years from the date of contract execution, and the requirement that individual Canadian utilities must demonstrate that they have uranium purchase contracts in place to cover their uranium requirements for a specified period of time has been eliminated.

The Canadian government continues to expect pricing terms in export contracts to provide for an equitable balance of benefits and risks, and to be generally not less favourable than those being obtained in the same time period by competing Canadian and international producers for contracts of similar duration. In the interests of promoting stable productivity and employment, each export contract should include mechanisms, such as escalating floor price provisions, which will help to reduce the impact of unexpected shifts in the market, and thereby contribute to a more predictable commercial environment for both the company and its employees.

With respect to uranium further processing, the Canadian government will require that Canadian uranium destined for use as enriched uranium fuel shall be upgraded to the maximum extent possible in Canada before export, as long as Canada's conversion facilities have the capacity. Exemptions to this requirement will be granted in cases where: i) the uranium will be converted or enriched or consumed in the United States, or ii) the Canadian converter is not the successful bidder for conversion services as a result of purely commercial considerations.

105 Canada

Finally, Ministers concluded that the uranium export policy should continue to be applied in a pragmatic manner, and that the current review process has proven to be efficient and responsive to the needs of the Canadian producers. It was therefore decided that the examination of uranium export contracts by the interdepartmental Uranium Exports Review Panel will be continued.

URANIUM STOCKS

There have been no significant changes to utility stockpile practices; refer to the 1989 Red Book.

URANIUM PRICES

Uranium Export Price* Statistics

1988 1989 1990

Average Price S79 S74 S71 CS/kgU Average Price S25 S24 S24 USS/lb U3Og Percentage Spot 13%. <1% <1% Deliveries

* Average Price of ALL Deliveries under export contracts.

106 • Chile •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The uranium exploration efforts done by the Chilean Nuclear Energy Commission (CChEN) between 1986 - 1990 centred around the refinement of the uranium favorability assessment done between 1983 - 1986.

This work included the begin of field work especially in areas underlain by Permo-'^iassic rocks (between 27° 30' and 31° latitude South) and by Neocomian volcanics in the Coastal Cordillera between 27° and 32° latitude South.

In a further step to support the uranium favorability assessment, a geological, geochcmical and radiometric data base was established.

In addition, the ground checking of airborne anomalies detected in the 1981 survey was continued.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In US$

1988 120 000

1989 129 400

1990 81 750

1991* 99 000

* Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

There arc several known uranium occurrences in Chile, hosting conventional and unconventional uranium resources.

The known and undiscovered conventional resources arc listed in the following tables, where, however, the resources are not subdivided into cost categories.

107 Chile

KNOWN CONVENTIONAL RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

OCCURRENCE DEPOSIT TYPE RAR EAR-I Salar Grande Surficial 28 - Estacion Romero Vein Type 32 236 (Productora)

TOTAL 60 236

In situ resources.

UNDISCOVERED CONVENTIONAL RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

OCCURRENCE DEPOSIT TYPE EAR-II + SR

Salar Grande Surficial 100

Pampa Camarones Surficial 4

Quillagua-Qda Amarga Surficial 24

Estacion Romero (Productora) Vein type 500

Los Mantos-El Durazno Vein type 130 TOTAL** 758

As in situ resources. For the purpose of this report these resources will be listed as EAR-II.

Unconventional uranium resources are known to exist in various types of copper deposits (Huinquintipa, Chuquicamata Norte, Chuquicamata Sur - Exotica, Algarrobo - El Roble) as well as in the Bahia Inglesa phosphorite deposit. These resources, not differentiated as to resource categories amount to a total of 5 147 tonnes U.

108 • China •

Data additional to the submission for the Red Book 1990 were made available after the report had been submitted for publication.

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Uranium exploration in China commenced in 1955 under the direction of the Bureau of Geology of the then Ministry of Nuclear Industry (now the Ministry of Energy with the China National Nuclear Corporation), which provides the required funds. The Bureau of Geology maintains a countrywide infrastructure including six regional branches with over 50 geological teams. The total staff amounts to over 50 000. Seven research institutes, eight equipment factories, a college of geology, seven technical schools, as well as an airborne and remote sensing center provide services and support.

Since 1955, nearly 3 million km2 equalling to 31 per cent of the total Chinese territory have been covered by surface gamma surveys and 1 834 km2 have been surveyed by airborne methods. Total drilling including some tunnelling, amounts to over 25 000 km.

The uranium exploration activities can be divided into three periods, from the mid-1950s to the mid-1960s, from the mid-1960s to mid-1970s and from the mid-1970s to the present time.

From mid-1950 through the mid-1960s, the main objective was the discovery of outcropping uranium deposits. As a result of this effort, some sandstone type uranium deposits including Daladi and Mengqiguer (see map) were discovered in Jurassic coal bearing sediments in the Illi intramontane basin (Xinjiang Autonomous Region) in 1955. Subsequent discoveries in 1956 included the sandstone type deposit Pukuitang of Cretaceaous-Tertiary age, near Hengyang (Hunan Province) and the Baiyanghe deposit (Xinjiang Autonomous Region) in upper Paleozoic volcanics. In 1957, the Xiwang deposit, the first discovery in granitic rocks, was found in a silicified fracture zone in the Guidong granite massif. In the same year, the first discovery in a volcanic environment was made in what would become the Xiangshan district.

In the second period, from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, a combination of metallogenetic research and geological exploration was applied both in areas with known uranium mineralisation and in unexplored regions. This led to a number of discoveries including:

- the Chanziping deposit (Guangxi Autonomous Region) in carbonaceous-siliceous-pelitic rocks; - the Qinlong deposit (Hebei Province) in sandstones; - the Jianchang deposit (Liaoning Province) in sandstones; - new deposits in siliceous limestones of Silurian age in northwestern China; - deposits in volcanic and granitic environments in southeastern China (Jiangxi and Guangdong Provinces), which made this part of the country an important uranium district; and

109 China

- several deposits in coal, sandstones and conglomerates of late Tertiary age in the western Yunnan Province.

From the mid-1970s through the present, modem exploration methods, including soil gas surveys, small diameter diamond drilling, estimation of undiscovered uranium resources as well as computerised geological data integration techniques have been used. Exploration concentrated on unexplored prospective areas and new deposit models in the North China platform and resulted in the discovery of additional resources in volcanic and sandstone deposits types in the Yanliao metallogcnetic belt. The recognition a potential to discover new deposits in northeastern China also was a result of these efforts. In addition, significant success was achieved in the search for new deposits in areas with known uranium resources, in southern China.

Plans have been made to continue and intensify uranium exploration in China with the primary objective of locating world class deposits, which could become the future source of uranium both for the domestic reactor related requirements and exports.

URANIUM RESOURCES

The uranium resources in China show distinct features as regards their space-time relationship. The most significant characteristics are as follows:

1. Known uranium deposits arc geographically widely distributed and show regional differences. Although there are known uranium deposits in nearly all provinces and'or autonomous regions of China, the bulk of the resources is concentrated in the central and eastern parts of the country.

2. The age of the uranium mineralisation is relatively young. Uranium occurs in all stratigraphic ages except the Ordovician. The majority of the resources was formed in upper Mcsozoic, but some are of Tertiary age.

3. The Chinese uranium deposits lend to occur in clusters. A district can host ten or more deposits. The typical ore grades are low varying from 0.1 to 0.5 per cent U.

4. The majority of uranium deposits belong to the following four deposit types, hosting the indicated percentage of the Chinese known resources:

• granite hosted 41 percent • volcanic hosted 20 per cent • sandstone hosted 21 percent • carbonaccous-siliccous- pclitic rock hosted 13 per cent • others, including U in coal, carbonates, quartzilcs, 5 per cent alkaline intrusives, phosphorites and pegmatites

110 PRINCIPAL URANIUM DEPOSITS IN CHINA

Baiyanghe > Daladi Mengqtguer

SHENYANG

Lianshanguan ^C Capital Quinlong • BEIJING if City

Principal uranium XIAN, deposits

CHENGDU •£

NANCHANG

CHANGSHA ^ # Xiangshan PuKuitang 4 #Xiwang Chanziping # Xiazhuang GUANGZHOU it 0 r China

Typical deposits of the first four important deposit types are the following ones:

The Xiazhuang district occurs in the Guidong graniuc massif of the Yanshan period (isotopic age 142.3 - 183.3 Ma). The uranium mineralisation is controlled by the intersection of a silicified fracture zone and lamprophyre dikes and has been dated at 59.5 - 86 Ma. There are two mineralogical associations: pitchblende-albitc-hematite and pitchblende-microquartz.

The Xiangshan district is located in the Ganhang volcanic hosted metallogenetic belt at the contact between the southern China Caledonian fold belt and the Yangzi paraplatform. The volcanic sequence of upper Jurassic age overlies low grade metamorphics of Sinian age, as well as a lower upper Jurassic sedimentary sequence. The uranium mineralisation occurs in a collapse type caldera and, more specifically, in a major shear fault zone. The host rocks include subvolcanic granite-porphyries, rhyolites and dacites and are affected by hematitisation, hydromicasation, chloritisalion, fluoritisation, etc. The uranium minerals are pitchblende, coffinite, uranothorite and brannerite.

The Qinlong district is located in a small down faulted basin between the Shanhaiguan paleo-uplift and the Yanliao graben. The basement of the basin is composed mainly of early Proterozoic granites and Archean gneisses. The basin fill consists of continental clastic sediments, volvanoclastic sediments as well as lavas of middle Jurassic age. The uranium mineralisation is located in the basal granite derived conglomerate and in carbonaceous tuffaceous sandstone and conglomerates and is associated with pyrite and organic matter. The age of the mineralisation ranges between 76 - 134 Ma.

The Chanziping deposit, hosted in carbonaceous-siliceous-pelitic rocks, is located in a Caledonian syncline between two granitic massifs. The ore bearing horizon is underlain by Sinian sediments (sandstone, dolomite, siliceous mudstone) and overlain by Cretaceous red beds (sandstone, conglomerates). The mineralised strata are of lower Cambrian age and include carbonaceous mudstonc (containing 46 per cent of the resources), siliceous mudstone (24 per cent), spotted slate (19 per cent) and argillaceous slate (11 per cent).

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)*

Principal Districts or Deposits** Defined Reserves*** Xiazhuang district 12 000 Xiangshan district 26 000 Qinlong disuict 8000 Chanziping deposit 5 000

* No information on recoverability available. ** Typical examples for different deposits types. *** Approximately equivalent to the sum of RAR + EAR-I, unassigned to any cost category.

112 China

In addition to the resources listed above, there is gocd potential of the discovery of presently undiscovered uranium resources. An estimation of undiscovered resources made in 1987 using the crustal abundance method indicated 1.77 million tonnes U as Speculative Resources, of which 1 million tonnes are concentrated in the western part of the country.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

There are a large number of smaller uranium production centres, which were operated in the past by local governments. At present, these facilities are closed or on stand-by due to the reduced demand. The few larger production centres are managed by the China National Nuclear Corporation ( CNNC) reporting to the Ministry of Nuclear Industries.

The construction of the first uranium mines and mills began in 1958. In 1962 and 1963 the Chenzhou and Dapu mines, as well as the Hengyang mill, located in the Hunan province became operational. The nominal capacity of the Hengyang plant is 800 000 tonnes ore/year or about 500 tonnes U/year. The ore is delivered from the Chenzhou and Dapu mines, which produce from carbonaceous-siliceous-pelitic and sandstone type deposits respectively.

Construction of the second group of production centres started in 1963, including the Fuzhou and Yining mine and mill complexes. Fuzhou, located in the Jiangxi province, is supported by more than ten volcanic type uranium deposits in the Xiangshan district. Four mines in this district began operations in 1965 and 1966 while the mill started up in 1976. Its nominal capacity is 200 000 tonnes ore/year yielding 200 - 300 tonnes U/year.

The Yining production centre is located in the western part of the Xinjiang Autonomous Province. The mill, which started operation in 1976, is supported by the two mines, Daladi and Mengqikur which exploit uraniferous coal of Jurassic age. The nominal capacity of this complex is 80 000 tonnes ore/year or about 50 tonnes U.

Due to the depletion of resources and the reduced requirements, a number of mines and mills were closed or placed on stand-by in 1980. They included among others, the Dapu mine, which had delivered ore to the Hengyang plant, as well as the Yining mine/mill. In addition, plans to develop new production centres including the Qinlong were postponed. This production centre located at the boundary between the Hebei and Liaoning provinces, was projected for a capacity of 300 000 tonnes ore/year or about 300 tonnes U.

In 1988, the employment in the above production centres amounted to about 10 000 persons.

The 1988 uranium production from the Hengyang and Fuzhou production centres totalled 344 tonnes U. The throughput of these two plants amounted to 235 000 tonnes and 143 000 tonnes ore respectively which yielded 207 and 137 tonnes U respectively.

113 China

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

There are three nuclear power plants of the PWR type currently under construction in China; these include Qinshan with an electricity generating capacity of 288 MW(e), under construction since March 1985, and the two units Daya Bay 1 and 2, each with a capacity of 930 MW(e), under construction since 1987 and 1988, respectively.

In addition there are plans for the construction of one PWR of 300 MW(e) and two additional PWRs at Qinshan of 600 MW(e) each and of two VVR-type reactors of 1000 MW(c) each in northeastern China.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY* (MW(e)j

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

- - 288 2 150 2 150 2 150 2 450 3 650 5 650

Secretariat estimate.

ANNUAL REACTOR RELATED REQUIREMENTS* (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 - 50 330 330 330 370 520 550 850

Secretariat estimate.

NATIONAL POLICIES

China is prepared to strengthen the co-operation with foreign parties in the field of uranium, on the basis of equality and mutual benc^s.

Recently, technical co-operation agreements have been concluded with some Asian countries. These agreements provided for technical services by Chinese specialists.

114 • Cuba •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The relevant authorities are currently determining the uranium favourability of certain areas. This includes both the analyses of previously collected geological information, as well as the implementation of a nationwide airborne spectrometer and magnetometer survey planned to continue through 1992.

In parallel, the uranium potential of certain areas in the Province Pinar del Rio was determined using airborne spectrometry data.

Based both on the results of the favourability determination and the exploration results areas for further work were delineated.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

In Cuba, two reactors of the VVR type, Juragua 1 and 2, are under construction since October 1983 and February 1985 respectively. Theirelectricity generating rapacity will be 408 MW(c) each. The grid connection of Juragua 1 is estimated to occur in 1993. For Juragua 2 no information regarding the completion of the construction is available, but it can be estimated that it could be connected to the grid in 1995.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY* [MW(c)l

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

- - - 408 408 816 816 816 816

Secretarial estimate.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS* (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

- 80 160 160 160 160 160 160 160

Secretarial estimate.

115 f I

• Denmark (Greenland) •

Background

The situation regarding resources and production of uranium in Denmark including Greenland has not changed during 1989 and 1990. Exploration has not been carried out in recent years. Thus, the uranium deposit at Kvanefjeld in South Greenland remains the only known deposit which might become economically viable in the near term. There is currently no uranium mining or production in Denmark. There are also no reactor related requirements for uranium. No nuclear capacity is expected in the short term.

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U to $80/kg U between S80-130/kg U

- 27 000 - 16 000

Speculative Resources are only presented for South Greenland which is believed to have the highest potential. Uranium is contained in alkaline magmatic rocks similar to the Kvanefjeld type.

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES (SR) (Tonnes U)

Recoverable at costs up to $130/kg U Cost Range Unassigned

50 000 10 000

116 • Egypt •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The Nuclear Materials Authority, which succeeds the Nuclear Materials Corporation, has maintained a steady level of uranium exploration during 1989 and 1990. Special emphasis is directed towards detailed geological-gcochemical surveys supported by mineralogical investigations, of the uranium deposits Wadi Nasieb, Gabal Gattar, El Missikat and El Erediya as well as Urn Ara shown on the included map. In addition, deep trenching, tunneling and diamond drilling have been initiated for the purpose of ore evaluation and reserve estimation.

The Wadi Nasieb deposit, located in West-Central Sinai (see map) is hosted by carbonaceous marls as well within karstic features in a dolomitic horizon of Carboniferous age. A network of about 700 m tunnels have been completed. Systematic sampling of the workings has also been completed for the purpose of grade determination and ore reserve estimation. Radiometric assaying of the sample material is being carried out and is expected to be completed ir mid 1991. Also in progress are laboratory scale metallurgical tests. The Wasi Nasieb deposit is classified as a sandstone type uranium deposit, whereas the mineralisation in the karst belongs to the surficial type.

At Gabal Gattar (see map), uraninitc traces and uranophane associated with violet fluorspar, molybdenite and quartz represent the oxidation zone of the deposit. A planned system of about 600 m tunnels is almost 50 per cent completed. This network is designed to explore the mineralisation at depth as well as to provide room for diamond drilling to explore, evaluate and estimate the ore reserves in this deposit, which is classified as a vein type deposit.

The area of the El Missikat and El Erediya deposits (see map) has been explored by about 4 000 m tunnels, from where deep exploration drilling has been started in early 1991. The two deposits are also classified as vein type deposits.

The Urn Ara deposit (see map) is located in closely spaced joints and fractures in a highly tectonized microcline granite and in a shear zone near the contact between the granite pluton and intruded Prccambrian sediments and volcanics. The mineralisation consists of pitchblende and uranophane associated with violet fluorspar as joint and fracture fillings. A series of deep trenches are being blasted to obtain information for planning a drilling programme in 1992.

117 Egypt

Uranium Deposits in Egypt

MEDITERRANEAN SEA

0 50 100 150 200 250 300350km

118 Egypt I Finland

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In Egyptian Pounds InUSS

1988 7090 000 3 123 000

1989 6 740 000 2 688 000

1990 8 330 000 3 108 000

1991* 8000 000 2 410 000

Planned.

• Finland •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Uranium exploration has been carried out in Finland from the 1950s to 1989. Since 1989, however, no uranium exploration projects have been undertaken. The Geological Survey continues its radiometric mapping as a part of the national programme for low-altitude airborne geophysical survey. Minor efforts have been directed to the follow-up of acroradiometric gamma anomalies. Uranium exploration methods are also being used as tools in other exploration and research projects of the Survey. The annual expenditures of uranium exploration have decreased to a level less than 50 000 US dollars, with only a minor portion of this money being used for exploration activities in the field.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC (Government)

YEAR InFIM InUSS

1988 547 000 136 000

1989 200 000 45 000

1990 0 0 1991 0 0

119 Finland

URANIUM DEPOSITS AND OCCURRENCES IN FINLAND

IPATTI MARTINMONTTU RUUNANIEMI

<§ 150

km km

120 Finland

URANIUM RESOURCES

No significant changes have occurred since the 1989 Red Book in the resource estimates. Because of insufficient studies on uranium recovery, all figures for tonnages are geological (in situ) estimates.

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to $80/kg U between $80-130/kg U to $80/kg U between $80-130/kg U - 1500 - -

BY-PRODUCT RESOURCES* (Tonnes U)

Deposit Name Location Deposit Type Tonnes U** Grade % U Production Centre

Talvivaara Sotkamo Black schist 3000-9000 0.002-0.004 - Sokli Savukoski Carbonatite 2500 0.01 -

* These resources do not support any production centre. ** In situ estimates.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Finland has not produced "ranium in recent years.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 Conventional Mining 30 - - - 30 -

121 Finland

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

At the beginning of 1991, Finland had four reactors in operation: TVO-1, TVO-2, Loviisa-1, and Loviisa-2 with an installed capacity as of 31 December, 1990, of 2.3 GWe. There arc no reactors under construction and no reactors firmly committed for the short-term. Finland has had a general moratorium on developing new nuclear power sites since 1987. This moratorium was ended in early 1991 and the country has commenced feasibility studies for installing a new nuclear plant at the TVO Olkiluoto site if a BWR is chosen and at the IVO Loviisa site if a PWR is chosen. If the studies prove favourable, the nuclear unit could conceivably be put in service by the year 2000. In the meantime, there have been no significant changes to the uranium requirements reported by Finland since 1988.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 572 465 465 465 465 465 455 455 455

STOCKS

The nuclear power utilities, Imatran Voima Oy (IVO) and Tcollisuudcn Voima Oy (TVO), maintain reserves of fuel elements for about one year's use. TVO also possesses uranium abroad for another year's use. Stockpiling of feed uranium in Finland is not seen as necessary.

122 Finland

TOTAL URANIUM STOCKS (Tonnes Natural U-equivalent)

Holder Natural uranium Enriched uranium Depleted uranium Reprocessed stocks stocks stocks uranium stocks

Utility 600 (a) 465 (b) - -

TOTAL 600 465

(a) Stocks are located abroad at different processing facilities (conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication). (b) Fresh fuel assemblies stored at the reactor sites.

NATIONAL POLICIES

There have been no significant changes to Finnish uranium policies since the 1989 "Red Book" publication. Licenses for mining, enrichment, possession, fabrication, production, transfer, handling, use and transport of nuclear materials and nuclear wastes may be granted only to Finnish citizens, Finnish corporations or foundations or to governmental authorities. However, under special conditions, foreign corporations or authorities may be granted a license to transport nuclear material or nuclear waste within Finland.

PRICES

Due to confidentiality aspects the price data are not available (one can assume that the prices arc close to those published in Sweden).

123 • France •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Uranium prospecting in France has declined substantially over the last few years. This trend should continue throughout 1991. Exploration work has mainly been concentrated in north-westem France and the southern part of the Massif Central, and has been restricted to permit areas where mines are already in operation or to areas bordering on such permits.

Very little prospecting has been carried out outside the above areas.

French mining companies have also reduced their exploration activities abroad, preferring to concentrate on a few selected target areas.

French companies are directly or indirectly (through their subsidiaries) involved in prospecting activities in Australia, Canada, Spain and the United States. In Canada and the United States they are also involved in mining operations.

The following mine operators were involved in uranium prospecting in France in 1989 and 1990:

- COGEMA (Compagnie G6n£rale des Matieres Nucteaires), a subsidiary of the Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique (French Atomic Energy Commission);

- CFM (Compagnie Franchise de Mokta), a subsidiary of COGEMA;

- SAE (Soci&e- Auxiliaire d'Energie), a subsidiary of Electricity de France;

- Total Compagnie Miniere France, a subsidiary of Compagnie Franchise des Pdtroles.

AH mine operators are private companies in which the French government holds a stake through its shareholdings in the parent companies.

124 Main Uranium Deposits in France France

SCALE

0 SO 100 150 200 i i | km

LEGEND

URANIUM DEPOSITS:

# Baing minad 1 Ponth/y 7. La Brugaaud (Baasinas) 15 Cerilly 2. Pannaran 8. Ballazana 16. Grury To ba minad A 3 La Chardon 9 Fanay 17. Las Bois Noirs • Minad out L'Ecarpiare La Fraiaaa 16. Coutras 4 Baaurapaira 10. Margnae 19. La Calliar U9. Operating Uranium Mill 5. La Chapella Largaau Vanachat Laa Piarrat Plantaas La Commandaria 11. Hanriatta 20 Las Bondons Laucogranita La Dorgitaltra 12. Hyvamarasaa 21. Bartholena (Las Ballaures) mnnnn Variscan Massif 6. La Barnardan (Mailhac) 13. St. Piarra du Cantai 22. Mas Lavayra (St. Martin du Bosc) 14 La Basta 23. Trevilla

Source: CEA-DAMN 30.04.91

125 France

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC Industry expenditures

YEAR In French francs (x 1000) InUSS

1988 280 000 47 406 000

1989 210 831 33 046 000 1990 176 650 32 472 000 1991* 160 070 27 742 000

Planned.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES IN OTHER COUNTRIES Industry expenditures

YEAR In French francs (x 1000) InUSS 1988 46 180 7 748 000 1989 58 235 9 128 000

1990 31 150 5 726 000

1991* 31 900 5 528 (X)0

Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Known Conventional Resources (RAR and EAR Category I)

Faced with unfavourable market conditions, exacerbated by a decline in dollar/franc parity, French mine operators have been forced to focus their attention on resources and to reassess the cost of their mining and processing operations as well as the value of certain deposits.

In addition, closures of the production centre at Langogne en Lozcrc (1989), the Vended Division (1990) and a number of mines in the Limousin region (1991) have led to the abandonment of other resources, which were no longer economically viable because of high production costs or the loss of initial infrastructure such as a nearby processing plant.

This combination of factors resulted i.i a significant drop in known resources compared with the figures reported in previous years.

126 France

Current known conventional resources are found in various types of geological formation:

- ore bodies and associated veins in Hcrcynian leucocratic granites in which mineralisation usually dates from the Permian period;

- localised ore bodies in faults in fine dctrital sedimentary formations from the Permian period; the deposition of these bodies dates from the Jurassic to the Cretaceous periods;

- lenses and ore bodies in Permian or Tertiary siltstone formations.

The average uranium content of deposits varies from 1 to 5 %c, but in very local concentrations may exceed 1 per cent.

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to S80/kg U between S80-130Ag U to SSQ/kg U between S80-13O/kg U

23 791 15 683 4 241 3 878

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Status of Production Capability

Production capability amounted to 3 920 tonnes of uranium a year in 1989, but fell to 3 720 tonnes a year during 1990 as a result of the closure of the Langognc (Lo/erc) plant.

In March 1991, following closure of the Ecarpiere production centre in the Vendue, production capability fell to 3 070 tonnes a year.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Toml to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 ll>88 1989 1990 1990 1991

Conventional Mining 54 072 3 394 3 241 2 841 63 548 2 508

127 France

Ownership Structure of the Uranium Industry

All uranium production units are owned by private companies in which the government is a major shareholder.

The following mine operators were involved in uranium production in France in 1989 and 1990:

- COGEMA (Compagnie G6neYale des Matieres Nucteaires), a subsidiary of the Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique (French Atomic Energy Commission);

- CFM (Compagnie Francaise de Mokta), a subsidiary of COGEMA;

- Total Compagnie Miniere France, a subsidiary of Compagnie Franchise des Petroles.

All mine operators are private companies in which the French government holds a stake through its shareholdings in their parent companies.

A breakdown of the output of these companies in 1990, based on public or private ownership of the parent companies, is given in the table below:

OWNERSHIP OF URANIUM PRODUCTION

DOMESTIC FOREIGN TOTALS

Government Private Government Private

[tU] [%] [tU] [%} [tUl [tU] [%} [tU] [%) 2666 94 175 2 841 100

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years)

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991

3 682 3 508 3 247 3 145 3 089 2 786 2 276 NR

128 France

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

On January 1st, 1991, France had a total of 56 reactors connected to the grid and six reactors under construction. However, growth in the French nuclear programme has begun to slow down. No new orders have been placed for nuclear reactors since 1987, although this situation is expected to change in the 1990s.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (GWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 55.8 56.4 57.7 59 58.5 60.0 65.7 NA NA

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

7 200 7 300 7600 7 700 7 800 7900 8600 NA NA

URANIUM STOCKS

EdF possesses emergency uranium stocks, the minimum level of which has ben fixed at the equivalent of three years' forward consumption to face possible supply interruptions.

NATIONAL POLICY

Likewise, there have been no significant changes to national policy since the last report. Uranium exploration and production in France are unrestricted within the framework of existing regulations. There are no tariff barriers for imports.

URANIUM PRICES

Owing to the fact that there are only two principal uranium producers (COGEMA and TOTAL) and one principal uranium consumer (EdF), details of their transactions arc maintained commercially confidential.

129 • Germany •

Introduction

On October3, 1990, the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) was reunified with the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). Since the late forties the GDR has been a very important uranium producer, but only sparse information about this was available in the Western world and none was presented for the Red Book. After re-unification, the state-owned uranium company, SDAG Wismut1, released the information on uranium exploration, resources and production for inclusion in this edition of the Red Book. To provide clarification of the new figures, some of the discussion of Germany's uranium resources, production and demand is broken down into "formerGDR" and "former FRG".

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Former GDR Background

Uranium exploration and mining was undertaken from 1946 to 1953 by the Soviet stock company SAG Wismut. These activities were centered around old mining locations of silver, cobalt, nickel and other metals in the Erzgebirge (Ore Mountains) and in Vogtland, Saxony, where uranium had first been discovered in 1789. The mining of uranium first began at the cobalt and bismuth mines near Schneeberg and Oberschlema (a famous radium spa). During this early period more than 100 000 people were engaged in exploration and mining. The richer pitchblende ore from the vein deposits was hand-picked and shipped to the USSR for further processing. Lower grade ore was treated locally in small processing plants. In 1950 the central mill at Crossen near Zwickau/Saxony was brought into operation.

In 1954, the company underwent a revision and a new joint Soviet-German stock company was created named: "SDAG Wismut". The joint company was held equally by both governments. Again, all uranium which was produced by Wismut as hand-picked concentrate, gravity concentrate and chemical concentrate was shipped to the USSR for further treatment. The price for the final product was simply agreed between the two partners. Sales profits were used for further exploration and capital expenditures supplemented since the mid-1970s additional funds from both governments.

At the end of the 1950s, uranium mining was concentrated in the region of Eastern Thuringia. Uranium exploration had started in 1950 in the vicinity of the radium spa at Ronneburg. Since the beginning of the 1970s, the mines in Eastern Thuringia provided about 2/3 of Wismut's annual production.

1. Sowjetisch-Deutsche Aktiengesellschaft (Soviet-German Stock Company).

130 Germany

Exploration and Mining Areas of SAG WISMUT - SDAG WISMUT

(Former GDR Depicted)

50 km

\ .• ,| Reconnaissance F$$^J Detailed Exploration I* 11 Mining Areas

131 Germany

URANIUM DEPOSITS AND OCCURENCES IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

t>* ^pin* erojtnic *»«•

132 LEGEND

I GEOLOGY a. Quaternary b. Tertiary c. Alpine molasse (Tertiary) d. Alpine orogenic zone (Mesozoic) e. Mesozoic sandstones f. Mesozoic g. Permian volcanics (rhyolite) h. Permocarboniferous i. Variscian granites j. Rheno-hercynian zone (Paleozoic) k. Saxo-thuringian zone (metamorphic) 1. Moldanubian zone (metamorphic) m. Uranium deposits > 5000 tU n. Uranium deposits 500 - 5000 tU o. Uranium occurrences

II URANIUM DEPOSITS AND OCCURRENCES 1 Ronneburg/Thuringia 2 Schlema/Saxony 3 Culmitzsch-Sorge-Gauern/Thuringia 4 Zobes/Saxony 5 KOnigstein/Saxony 6 Tellerhauser/Saxony 7 Johanngeorgenstadt/Saxony 8 Freital/Saxony 9 Annaberg/Saxony 10 "Weisser Hirsch" (Antonsthal) Saxony 11 Schneckenstein/Saxony 12 Hauptmannsgriin-Neumark/Saxony 13 Rittersgriin/Saxony 14 Barensiein/Saxony 15 Marienberg/Saxony 16 Zeiu-Baldenhain/Thuringia 17 Prehna/Thuringia 18 UntitzfThuringia 19 Gera-Siid/Thuringia 20 Serbitz, Kyhna-Schenkenberg and Werben/Saxony 21 Rudolfstadt/Thuringia 22 Dittrichshutte/Thuringia 23 Schleusingen/Thuringia 24 Grossschloppen/Bavaria 25 Mlillenbach/Baden-WUrttemberg 26 Menzenschwand/Baden-Wiirttemberg 27 Mahring-Poppenreuth/Bavaria

133 Germany

Between the mid 1960s and the mid 1980s, about 45 000 people were employed by SDAG Wismut. More than 50 per cent of these were in uranium exploration, mining and milling with the remaining people employed in other sectors (e.g., civil engineering, machine building, transportation, general services, health service etc.). In the middle of the 1980s, Wismut's employment decreased to about 30 000. In 1990, only about 18 000 people worked in uranium mining and milling.

From 1946 to 1990 about 5.6 billion Mark (GDR) were spent ju^t on uranium exploration and an additional 16 billion Mark (GDR) for mine development, mining and milling.

The cost of Wismut's uranium production increased significantly from the mid-1960s to the end of the 1980s, rising from 100 GDR Mark/kg U to around 350 GDR Mark/kg. The rise was chiefly due to increasing costs for mining and equipment and also due to decreasing ore grades. As a result of the rising production costs, both the GDR and USSR governments became financially involved in supporting the uranium production.

Uranium Exploration

Uranium exploration in the southern part of the former GDR covered an extensive area of approximately 55 000 km2 (see map) and applied the following methods at various stages:

- regional and detailed geological mapping (1:200 000 to 1:10 000); - aerial gamma spectrometric surveys (1:50 000 to 1:10 000); - surficial radiometric and radon surveys (1:50 000 to 1:10 000); - seismic, gravimetric, magnetic and electromagnetic surveys ( 1:200 000 to 1:25 000); - surface and underground drilling (core and non-core) to 1800 m depth from surface and 300 m from underground; - trenching, tunneling and underground driving.

Detailed drilling (36 000 holes) in grid patterns of 1200 x 600 m and 50 x 50 m also was carried out in an area covering approximately 26 000 km2. Exploration was terminated at the end of 1990. Further details on uranium exploration are given below:

A. Reconnaissance prospecting and exploration

- Drilling total: 24 000 km • Surface: 8 000 km • Underground: 16 000 km

- Underground tunnelling and driving: 1 600 km - Trenches and investigation pits (depth to 20 m): 1 million m' - Total expenditures: 5.6 million Mark (GDR)

B. Investigation during mining (development)

- Drilling: 8 500 km - Tunnelling: 2 200 km

134 Germany

C. Breakdown of annual expenditures for exploration

1946-1982: 4 300 million Mark GDR 1983 180.5 million Mark GDR 1984 189.6 million Mark GDR 1985 189.6 million Mark GDR 1986 174.7 million Mark GDR 1987 167.4 million Mark GDR 1988 174.5 million Mark GDR 1989 133.0 million Mark GDR 1990 (1/1- 30/6) 44.8 million Mark GDR 1990 (1/7- 31/12) 14.4 million D-Mark (FRG)

Specific costs for the delineation of geological resources: 20 Mark/kg U.

Recent and Ongoing Uranium Exploration Activities

No uranium exploration activity took place in western Germany in 1989 and 1990. In the former GDR, however, exploration was carried out during this same lime period. The GDR exploration was carried out in the vicinity of existing mines and amid extensions of known deposits so as to increase the known resource amounts (RAR and EAR-I category) and to replace mined out tonnages.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC

In the FRG (western part)

YEAR In million D-Mark In million USS 1988 5.4 3 1989 0 0 1990 0 0 1991* 0 0

Planned.

i Germany

In the former GDR (until 30.6.1990 in Mark of GDR, since 1.7.1990 in D-Mark)

YEAR In million Mark In million D-Mark In million USS 1988 174.5 - 102.6 1989 133.0 - 66.8 1990 44.8 14.4 26.8 1991* 0 0 0

Planned.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - ABROAD

YEAR In D-Mark In USS 1988 25 000 000 14 000 000 1989 17000 000 9000 000 1990 11 300 000 7000 000 1991* 8 500 000 4 971000

Planned.

Description of deposits in the former GDR

According to their geological setting the uranium deposits in eastern Germany can be subdivided into five major types (see map).

1. Type Ronneburg: Polygenetic lens-shaped to stock work-type deposits in black shale,

limestone and diabase of Paleozoic age.

2. Type Erzgebirge: Hydrothermal veins at the exocontact of Hercynian granites.

3. Type Konigstein: Peneconcordant and stack-type deposits in sandstone of Upper Cretaceous age. 4. Type Zechstein: Seam-like deposits in Upper Permian calcareous sediments of fluviatile to lagoonal deposition.

5. Type Freital: Uraniferous hard coal in Lower Permian continental sediments.

136 Germany

(1) The deposits of the type Ronneburg occur in an area of about 162 km2 of which 51 km2 were investigated by mining. The uranium ores are associated with intensively folded and faulted rocks of Upper Ordovician age (micaceous slates, sandy, calcareous with pyrite - so called Lederschiefer), of Lower Silurian age (siliceous, argilliceous, sapropelitic black shales with up to 10 per cent C organic, pyrite, marcasite - so called Graptholithenschiefer), and intercalated Upper Devonian diabase.

The formation of the uranium deposit is the result of several complex processes which can be explained in a simplified way as follows: uranium is syngenetically concentrated in the Silurian black shales ( up to 60 ppm U). Due to weathering (to a depth of 100 m) uranium, carbonate and sulfur have been removed by leaching and were transported along fractures into deeper zones where reducing material formed a geochemical barrier which favoured the precipitation of uranium minerals (mainly pitchblende), carbonate and minor amounts of sulfides of Pb, Zn, Cu, and arsenides of Co and Ni. Two major periods of ore forming processes, between 240 and 180 million years and around 90 million year?, have been observed.

In general, the uranium content of the ore bodies is in the range of 0.085 to 0.097 per cent U, sometimes exceeding 0.1 per cent. The deposits were open-pit mined initially, but are presently mined using underground methods.

(2) The hvdrothermal vein deposits of the Erzgebirge are located in folded, faulted, and overthrusted contact-metamorphic rocks around granitic intrusions of Hercynian age. The host rocks are of Proterozoic, Cambrian, Ordovician and Devonian age and are composed of mica shales, banded shales and amphibolites. Uranium mineralisation is found to a depth of 2 200 m. Major ore concentrations are found in lensoid bodies of 10 to 100 m2 size in the veins, reaching concentrations of 1 kg/m2 to 40 kg/m2 (average 2.8 kg/m2). Pitchblende is the main uranium ore mineral associated with quartz, dolomite and calcite. In the upper parts of the veins, sulfides and arsenides of the classical five element paragenesis (Bi, Co, Ni, Ag, U) were developed and mined for centuries.

An average head grade of 0.4 per cent U was obtained by radiometric ore sorting.

(3) The deposits of the sandstone type at KOnigstein occur in continental lagoonal and marginal marine sandstone of Cenomanian and Turanian age in the depression of the Elbtal-Graben. The overall thickness of the sandstone reaches 50 m. Single orebodies are of 1500 m x 100 to 50 m size at 0.5 to 2.5 m thickness. Major ore minerals are pitchblende and "uranium blacks", associated with organic material and pyrite, and, in the case of stack ore, with hematite and barite.

The average grade for conventional mining (until 1983) was 0.11 per cent U. The recovery cf low grade ore using underground leaching operations was started in 1971 in specially prepared orebodies. Since 1984 uranium has been produced by underground leaching method exclusively.

(4) The deposits of the Zechstein-typc are located in Upper Permian, continental to lagoonal shale, sandstone and dolomite. Uranium mineralisation occurred as very fine dissemination (not defined) in the matrix of the sediments in four seams of 0.2 to 2.5 m thickness. Uranium was mined between 1951 and 1965 open pit viih an average grade of 0.066 per cent U.

137 Germany

(5) In the coal deposit of Lower Permian age (Rotliegendes) at Freital near Dresden, uranium was found in 1947 and mined in two periods, 1952 to 1955, and 1968 to 1989. Uranium as pitchblende was concentrated in three coal seams of one to three m thickness. The average grade of the mined ore varied between 0.086 and 0.109 per cent U before processing. The ore was radiometrically sorted before it was transported for processing at Crossen and Seelingstadt.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Known Conventional Resources

The known conventional resources in the cost category of less than $130/kg U in the western portion of Germany remain essentially unchanged from those reported in the 1989 Red Book. Minor changes in the RAR (<$80/kg U category) have occurred due to a re-evaluation of the reserves. These low cost reserves now amount to 600 tonnes U. All known conventional resources in the eastern portion of Germany are classified in the cost category of $130 to 260/kg U even though a minor portion may be minable at lower costs. The RAR in the $130 to 260/kg U category amount to 17 000 tonnes U with the EAR-I resources being estimated at 30 600 tonnes U for the same cost category.

KNOWN URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I) Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to S80Ag U between $80-130/kg U to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U 600 4000 1 600 5 700

Note: Mining and ore processing losses have been deducted for the known resource cost categories amounting to 10-15 per cent and 5 per cent respectively.

The following table contains a breakdown of the uranium resources for the SDAG Wismut deposits. The figures were provided by SDAG Wismut as minable resources in the categories CI = RAR and C2 = EAR-I. According to the cost estimations, the resources should be classified in the category of $130 to 260/kg U. A minor but yet undefined portion of the RAR may be minablc at costs of $80 to 130/kg U. The past production for the five deposit types (not including losses) has been provided for comparison.

138 Germany

URANIUM RESOURCES OF SDAG WISMUT (Tonnes U as of 1/1/91)

Deposit Type Past % of Past Present FResource s Known % of Production Production Resources RRA RSE-1 RAR + EAR 1 RAR + EAR I

Ronneburg 110 690 44.7 14 290 29 760 44 050 92.3 (black shales)

Erzgebirge 102 467 41.4 1000 520 1 520 3.2 (veins)

Konigstein 18 772 7.6 1 760 390 2 150 4.5

Zechstein 11 953 4.8 - - - - (Permian sediment)

Freital (coal) 3 693 1.5 - - - -

Others 180 - - - - -

TOTAL 247 755 100 17 050 30 670 47 720 100

Note: Due to losses during mining and milling, the total past production amounts to 216 500 tonnes U. Present resources correspond to cost category S130 to 260/kg U.

Undiscovered Conventional Resources (EAR-II and SR)

There are no significant changes in the undiscovered conventional resources for the western portion of Germany from those reported in the last Red Book. In the eastern portion of Germany, the combined resources of EAR-II + SR amount to 61 500 tonnes U. These resources are all above $130/kg U and some resources may be above $260/kg U. See the enclosed map for the location of the resources.

UNDISCOVERED RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES SPECULATIVE RESOURCES (SR) Category II (EAR-II)

Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Cost range unassigned to S80/kg U between 580-130/kg U toS130/kgU

2 500 3 500 15 000 0

Notes: Mining and ore processing losses have not been deducted for the undiscovered resource categories. No figures were available for Unconventional or By-Product Resources in the former GDR.

139 Germany

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Status of Production

The uranium processing plant at Ellweiller, operated by Gewerkschaft Brunhilde in the western part of Germany had a capacity of 125 tonnes U/year. This plant started operation in 1960 as a test mill for several types of ore in the FRG and was permanently closed on May 31, 1989 after a total production of around 700 tonnes uranium. Production in 1989 amounted to 17 tonnes U from ores of the underground test operations at Menzenschwand. The mill will be dismantled and the area reclaimed.

In the eastern portion of Germany (i.e., former GDR), two processing plants were operated by the state owned company, SDAG Wismut (the governments of the GDR and USSR each owned 50 per cent of the company). The plant at Crossen (near Zwickau/Saxony) started ore processing operations in 1950. The ores were transported by road and rail from numerous mines in the Erzgebirge. The composition of the ore from the hydrothermal deposits required carbonate pressure leaching at Crossen. The plant had a maximum capacity of 2.5 million tonnes of ore per year. Crossen was permanently closed on December 31,1989. A decision has been taken to dismantle the mill. However, the plans for the reclamation of the site and the tailings disposal are still being developed.

The second plant at Seelingstadt (near Gera/Thuringia) started its ore processing operations in 1960 using the nearby deposits of black shale. The maximum capacity of this plant is 4.6 million tonnes ore per year. In the Seelinstadt plant, silicate ore was treated by acid leaching until the end of 1989. Carbonate rich ore was treated using the carbonate pressure leaching technique. Since that time, all ores have been treated using the carbonate pressure leaching technique.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U)

Processing Plant 1989 1990 1991 (expected)

Crossen and Seelingsladt 3 800 - - Scclingstadt - 2 972 1 190

140 Germany

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Including uranium production in the former GDR

1 Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991

Conventional Mining 199 278 3 456 3 332 2 588 208 654 920 In-Situ Leaching 3 340 393 370 340 4 443 235 Heaps Leaching 3 680 116 115 44 3 955 35

TOTAL 206 297 3 965 3 817 2 972 217 051 1 207

Ownership structure of the uranium industry

As noted previously, the state company SDAG was equally owned by the governments of the GDR and the USSR. The operations were controlled by the GDR Ministry of Economics and the USSR Ministry for Atomic Power and Industry (MAPI). After German unification in 1990, ownership of the GDR share transferred to the government of the Federal Republic of Germany. Later in 1991, the USSR share was sold to the FRG. Ultimately, the FRG plans to transform SDAG Wismut into a limited liability privately owned company (GmbH).

Employment in the uranium industry

A maximum of about 110 000 people were employed by SDAG Wismut in the early 1950s although the distribution between mining and ore processing categories is not known. Wismut was an unusually large operation with a total employment of about 600 000 people in all branches of the company. In 1990, Wismut employed about 18 000 people in uranium mining and processing. After the termination of commercial production which was expected at the end of 1990, the employment would drop off to about 9 000 person-years, mainly engaged in shutdown operations, decommissioning and reclaiming.

Production centre employment for the FRG in the years 1984 to 1988 was reported in the 1989 Red Book. More recently, the FRG production centre employment for 1989 and 1990 has remained steady at 25 person-years.

EMPLOYMENT DM THE WESTERN GERMAN URANIUM INDUSTRY (Person-years)

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991

70 60 70 65 50 25 25 -

141 Germany

Historical Uranium Production in Garmany x 1000 tonnes U/year

f • & * t # # f f #

Cumulative Uranium Production in Germany x 1000 tonnes U

250

200

150

100

f f & f & # # J f f

142 Germany

Historic German Uranium Production (in metric tonnes)

-. ... . 1 . i FRG { GDR GERMANY YEAR __i! _ 1 TOTAL ! 1945 - 1 1946 ! 17 17 1947 - 150 150 1948 - 321 321 1949 - j 766 766 1950 . 1224 1224 1951 . 1675 1675 1952 i - 2199 1299 1953 - 3094 3094 1954 - 3967 3967 1955 - 4522 4522 1956 _ ! 5157 5157 1957 - 5278 5278 1958 - 5302 5302 1959 - 5345 5345 1960 - 5356 5356 1961 8 5991 5999 1962 11 6371 6382 1963 3 6730 6733 1964 16 6983 6999 1965 :_ J4 7090 _...._7104_

1966 13 7070 7083 1967 1 7110 7111 1968 7 6948 6955 1969 16 6412 6428 1970 _ 24 . _., 6389 6413

1971 18 6485 6503 1972 15 6627 6642 1973 6721 6721 1974 26 6777 6803 1975 _ 57 6884 6941 1976 38 6695 6733 1977 13 6314 6327 1978 35 6158 6193 1979 25 5266 5291 1980 35 5245 5280

1981 36 4877 4913 1982 34 4622 4656 1983 48 4477 4525 1984 33 4426 4459 1985 31 4470 4501

1986 26 4086 4112 1987 58 4059 4117 1988 41 3924 3965 1989 17 3800 3817 1990 2972 2972

1991 1207 - 1207

TOTAL 4878 213380 218258

143 Germany

EMPLOYMENT IN THE SDAG WISMUT PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-years)

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991

27 566 27 833 27 411 26 770 26 400 25 164 17 685 9000

Future production centres

After the termination of the commercial uranium production at the end of 1990, some time would be required for the shutdown of the conventional mines and for the termination of the underground leaching process at Konigstein. It is planned, but not yet decided, to keep the plant at Seelingstadt operational but at a reduced scale with the aim of a permanent shut down sometime in the future. The short-term production capability is 3 000 tonnes per year for resources recoverable at $130 to 260Ag U. This capability is expected to drop to 1 100 tonnes in 1991 and will cease by 1995.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

There are no significant changes to the future uranium requirements described in the 1989 Red Book. Following the reunification of Germany, it was decided that the 11 nuclear plants of the Soviet design in the former GDR could not operate unless they satisfied the safety requirements of the Atomic Energy Act. Units 1-4 at the Griefswald site had been in operation. Unit 5 was in the commissioning phase and Units 6-8 had been under construction. Unit 5 is shutdown pending the results of a safety analysis currently in progress, and construction of Units 6-8 was discontinued by the utility. Construction work on two units at Stendal has been stopped and a unit at Rheinsberg h: been shutdown and will be decommissioned. German utilities had planned to apply for the construction of new plants but now are waiting for the outcome of concerns expressed by the political parties, and no new license applications are expected in the near future.

Since the 1989 Red Book, there were no significant changes to the supply and procurement strategy.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 22 664 22 664 22 664 22 664 22 664 22 664 25 230 25 230 NA

144 Germany

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 3 300 3 300 3 300 3 300 3 300 3 300 3 700 3 700 NA

URANIUM POLICIES

There is no restriction for private and/or foreign participation in uranium exploration, production and marketing as long as these activities are carried out under existing laws. By the end of 1990, government funding of uranium exploration was terminated.

URANIUM STOCKS

The German utilities seek tc maintain a stockpile of uranium equal to the demand of approximately two or three years. Current utility stocks are in this range. Government stocks amount to 1 931.9 tonnes U natural equivalent.

TOTAL URANIUM STOCKS (Tonnes natural U-equivalent)

Holder Natural Enriched Depleted Reprocessed uranium uranium uranium uranium stocks stocks stocks stocks Government 1 932

Utility 10 500 2 500 0 0

TOTAL 12 432 2 500 0 0

145 • Greece •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Following the exploration plans for 1989 and continuing the efforts in 1990, Greece kept active over 14 projects mainly in northern Greece as following:

- Exploration - evaluation drilling over vein type pitchblende and 11 and rare earth mineralisations in the granitic center of the Rhodoppi metarnorphic massif- 4 projects. - Preliminary drilling in Haidou area - unconformity oetween Eocene acid volcanics and granitic basement rocks. - Follow-up detailed exploration in 3 major potential areas. - Preliminary exploration. Evaluation of results in potential areas located in previous years.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC (Government)

YEAR In Drachmas InUSS 1988 50 000 000 354 000 1989 88 000 000 540 000 1990 80 000 000 505 000 1991* 140 000 000 737 000

Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I) Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs to S80/kg U between 580-130/kg U up to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U 300 - 6 000 -

146 3 Greece

Uranium Deposits and Occurrences in Greece

Archontovouni Potami Spilia Haidou Vathirema'

(e)SERRES PARANESTI TCANTH) KOMOTINI

• KAVAIA •- • ALEXA);DR0up0u

MITILINI Is.

SAMOS Is IKARIAIs f g^y>

MYKONOS Is. Q C3 a

OQp

Q Conventional deposits

0 Non conventional deposits

A Uranium occurrences

50 100 km 1 '

147 Greece

UNDISCOVERED CONVENTIONAL RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES SPECULATIVE RESOURCES (SR) Category II (EAR-II)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Cost range up to S80/kg U between $80-130/kg U up to $130/kg U unassigned

6000 - 6000 -

UNCONVENTIONAL OR BY-PRODUCT RESOURCES (Tonnes U)

Deposit Name Location Deposit Type Tonnes U Grade Production Centre

Serres Senes Basin Uraniferous 4000 * lOOpprn lignite

Drimon Epirus Phosphates 500 ** 100 ppm

* Recoverable estimates. ** In situ estimates.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

There was no production of uranium reponed for Greece.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

There were no uranium requirements reponed for Greece and there are no installed nuclear power plants at present.

URANIUM STOCKS AND INVENTORIES

No uranium stocks were reported.

NATIONAL POLICIES

There were no changes in policy reported for Greece during the time period 1988 to January 1991.

148 • Hungary •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Exploration

Uranium exploration was confined to the Mecsek uranium deposit and the continued assessment of its ore reserves.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR InUSS 1988 2 500 000 1989 1 200 OOf

1990 NA 1991 NA

The above expenditures were provided for by the Hungarian Government as owner and operator of the Mecsek mine.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Hungary's reported uranium resources are limited to those of the Mecsek uranium deposit.

The ore deposit occurs in locally up to 600 m thick Upper Permian sandstones which were folded into the Permian-Triassic anticline of the Mecsek mountains. The ore bearing sandstone is part of the upper 200 m and is underlain by a very thick Permian siltstone and covered by a Lower Triassic sandstone. The thickness of the ore bearing green sandstone, locally referred to as the productive complex, varies from 15 to 90 m.

The ore minerals include uranium oxides and silicates as well as pyrite and marcasite.

The uranium resources include both known and undiscovered resources as detailed in the following tables.

149 Hungary

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I) Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U 1625 1 500 9 100 9 150

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category II (EAR-II) Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between 580-130/kg U 6 320 7 100

As in situ resources.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

The Mecsek mine, an underground operation is the only uranium producer in Hungary. It is being operated by the state owned Mecsek Ore Mining Company. Since about 1956 it produces at about 450 m depth 500 000 - 600 OCX) tonnes ore/year at an average mining recovery of 30 - 40 per cent. The ore processing plant has a capacity of 1 300 - 2 000 tonnes ore/day and employs radiometric sorting, agitated acid leach, heap leaching and ion exchange. The nominal production capacity of the mill is about 700 tonnes U/ycar.

At present, the mining operation is in a state of adjustment to the new economic and political conditions. This includes a reduction of production and work force as shown in the following tables.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 Conventional Mining 19 370 576 530 524 21 000 440

The employment in the Mccsck mine and mill is being significantly reduced from the peak work force in 1985 of nearly 7 500 to 2 300 asof 1.1.1991. Further information is provided in the following table.

150 Hungary

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years)

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991

7000 7 454 7 493 7 364 7 090 6 483 4 798 2 100

No information on short term production capability is available.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

Hungary operates four NPPs of the VVR-230 type with a total nuclear electricity generating capacity of 1760 MW(e). At present, there are no firm plans for the construction of further plants.

The annual uranium requirements for these NPPs are reported to be 420 tonnes U.

URANIUM PRICING

Until the end of 1990, the COMECON contract prices for nuclear fuel cycle materials and services were in force.

For 1991, an agreement between the Mccsek Ore Mining Company and the Hungarian Electric Works, which is operating the Paks nuclear power plants, provides for uranium prices of $60/kg U.

URANIUM POLICIES

The Hungarian Government decided in September 1989 to terminate the uneconomic uranium operations at Mecsck. Negotiations with the Irish mining company Glencar pic, which resulted already in a management contract to operate the mine and mill, should lead to the conclusion of a joint venture agreement. In view of the development the Hungarian Government reverted its earlier decision lo close the mine.

151 • India •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The Atomic Minerals Division (AMD) of the Department of Atomic Energy employs numerous techniques in its countrywide search for uranium and other nuclear raw material resources required for India's nuclear power programme. Field activities are supported by modem laboratory facilities, both for direct exploration purposes as well as for related research and development efforts directed towards the better understanding of ore forming processes to aid in new discoveries.

In 1989 and 1990, thirty exploration projects have been formulated based on conceptual models and further refined exploration strategies. These include the application of advanced geophysical and geochemical techniques, the wider use of remotely acquired data and the inclusion of geochronology in identifying time bound uranium mineralisation.

In a major breakthrough, AMD has discovered a uranium deposit in the upper Cretaceous Mahadek sandstone in the State of Meghalaya. Exploration efforts have been intensified to discover additional deposits of this type in similar geological environments in different parts of India.

While previously the majority of hydrothermal uranium deposits were confined to the Singhbhum Thrust Belt (STB), Bihar, new efforts outside the STB have resulted in the discovery of new deposits in the Bodal-Bhandaritola-Pavijhola shear zone, in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The mineralisation is located in lower Proterozoic basalts and rhyolites, which were slightly metamorphosed and technically affected by the emplacement of a granitic batholith.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In Rupee* In US$** 1988 186.10 13 664 1989 205.10 12 803 1990 262.50 15 138 1991*** 298.00 14 466

* In million Rupee. ** In thousand US$. *** Planned.

152 India

Recently, emphasis is laid on the exploration of Proterozoic basins, which resulted in the identification of potential uraniferous areas in the Vempalle limestone of the Cuddapah basin in the State of Andra Pradesh.

Airborne surveys conducted in recent years have lead to the identification of uranium mineralisation associated with ferrogenous cherts at the contact between Decca basalts and underlying crystalline rocks.

URANIUM RESOURCES

India's principal uranium deposits containing RAR and EAR-I are mainly confined to the vein type deposits of the STB in the State of Bihar. In recent years, however, AMD succeeded in proving the existence of uranium deposits in upper Cretaceous sandstones in the West Khasi Hills of Meghalaya State as well as in middle Proterozoic limestones of the Cuddapah basin in Andhra Pradesh. These deposits are referred to as Domiasiat and Tummalapalle respectively.

India reports known resources unassigned to any cost category as the present costs for mining and milling are not available at AMD. The RAR and EAR-I in terms of in situ resources as of 1st January 1991 amount to 50 610 tonnes and 15 540 tonnes II respectively.

The undiscovered resources including only SR are anticipated in the following geological environments:

- along a 64 km long middle Proterozoic Vempalle limestone belt in the Cuddapah basin, Andhra Pradesh;

- in upper Cretaceous fluviatile Mahadek sediments in Meghalaya;

- in quartz-pebble conglomerates at the base of the younger greenstone belts of Kamataka;

- in the Lesser Himalayas, where vein type mineralisation associated with shear zones is widespread; and

- in the Chhotanagpur gneissic complex of Sarguja in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

The SR also unassigned to any cost category are estimated to amount to 18 720 tonnes U as in situ resources, as of 1st January 1991.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

The uranium production in India is centered in the Shinghbhum Thrust Belt in the State of Bihar. Details on production and production capability are not available. However, it can be assumed that the current production as well as the future production cover the uranium requirements.

153 India I Indonesia

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

The Nuclear Power Corporation, an organisation reporting to the Department of Atomic Energy, as of the end of 1990, is operating seven nuclear power plants with a combined nuclear electricity generating capacity of 1 374 MW(e). In detail this park includes two Boiling Water Reactors (BWR) with a total of 300 MW(e) and five Pressurised Heavy-Water-Moderated and Cooled Reactors (PHWR) with 1 074 MW(e).

The current and projected nuclear electricity generating capacity and the related uranium requirements are summarized in the following tables.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY* [MW(e)J

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

1 374 1 700 1935 2 170 2 640 3 110 6 110 8 110 11 110

Secretariat estimate.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS* (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

220 255 290 325 400 470 920 1 210 1 650

Secretariat estimate.

• Indonesia •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The National Atomic Energy Agency (BATAN) continued its uranium exploration activities during the period 1989 - 90 at the uranium occurrences of Kalan and surroundings in the West Kalamantan region.

154 Indonesia

At Kalan, exploration concentrated in the sectors Remaja Hitam and Darab. The work included at Remaja Hitam surface drilling (1989: 12 drill holes totalling 817 m, 1990:9 deep holes with a total of 1 000 m and 126 shallow holes totalling 433 m) and at Darab geological, geochemical and geophysical (VLF and IP) investigations over 2.5 km2.

In addition, geological and radiometric mapping has been done over an area of 200 km2 underlain by the Cretaceous potassium granite of Tukul, Ketapang.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In Rupiah* InUSS

1988 343 600 206 000

1989 391 207 222 000

1990 668 904 365 000

1991** 1 278 907 656 000

* In 1 000 rupiah. ** Planned.

Plans for 1991 provide for additional geophysical investigation over 1.2 km2 at Darab, a 2 500 m drilling programme at Kalan and surroundings, as well as some test mining at Eko Rcmaja to collect data for a feasibility study. In addition, it is planned to cover 100 km2 at Kolawai with gcological- radiometric methods.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Indonesia's uranium resources are located in the Eko Remaja and Remaja Hitam sectors of the Kalan area, West Kalimantan.

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to 580/kg U between S80-l30/kg U up to S80/kg U between S80-13O/kg U 4 320 - - -

As in situ resources.

155 • Ireland •

Background

There is currently no uranium exploration, production or demand in Ireland. Exploration has not been carried out in recent years.

• Italy •

Historical Review

Although Italy currently imports more than 75 per cent of its energy requirements, its nuclear power programme was ended as a follow-up of a national referendum in 1987. The Garigliano 150 MWe nuclear plant had been shutdown earlier in 1982. The Caorso reactor (860 MWe) and the Trino reactor (260 MWe) had been shutdown for refueling when the November 1987 antinuclear referendum was passed. The Latina reactor (153 MWe) ceased operating in December, 1987. Progress on the partially constructed twin reactors at Montaldo di Castro (982 MWe each) and on the 8 planned reactors in the regions of Apulia, Lombardy, Piedmont and Venice were also suspended.

Then in 1988, a new National Energy Plan was formally adopted by the Council of Ministers and submitted to the Parliment. The plan called for a five-year moratorium on the use or commercial development of nuclear power. In June 1990, however, the Italian Parliament passed a resolution which permanently closed all four reactors. Interestingly, in the same resolution, the parliament confirmed its support for nuclear research and development and international collaboration sufficient to sustain its technological capacity.

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The first uranium deposit, the volcanogenic Permian Novazza, was discovered in the Central Alps as a result of exploration from 1954 to 1962. A second deposit, Valvedello, was also discovered in the same general area in the period from 1975 to 1983. More recently, very limited exploration in Italy also took place from 1985 to 1987 on three uranium projects with a total surface area of 25.7 square km. Foreign exploration has been carried out under joint-venture agreements in Canada, Zambia, Australia, and the USA by AGIP MINIERE. At present, foreign exploration is carried out under joint- venture agreement in Canada by Agip Miniere.

156 Italy

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In Lira InUSS 1988 NA NA

1989 NA NA 1990 NA NA

1991* NA 200 000

NA Not Available. * Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1987 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U between $80-130/kgU up to 580/kg U between S80-130/kg U 4 800 - - 1 300

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES (SR) Recoverable at costs up to $130/kg U Cost Category Unassigned

10 000* -

* Estimated in 1987.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

The Valvenova production centre, with a nominal production capacity of 260 tonnes U/year, is currently not operating.

157 Italy I Japan

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

In previous years (1987), Italy reported annual reactor related requirements of 765 tonnes U and enrichment feed requirements of 1 400 tonnes U. As noted in the proceeding historical section, however, Italy's current uranium requirements are zero.

URANIUM STOCKS AND INVENTORIES

The total stocks reportedly held in 1987 amounted to 15 738 tonnes U.

NATIONAL POLICIES

Prior to the moratorium, AGIP MINIERE was responsible for uranium related activities. Mining laws as reported in 1987, put no restriction on uranium exploration by foreign companies. Further, there is no official government policy on the export and stockpiling of uranium.

• Japan •

Historical Review

The Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation (PNC) was established in 1967 in accordance with the Atomic Energy Basic Law, with the aim of developing its own fast breeder reactors, heavy water reactors, and also for systematically supplying and efficiently developing uranium resources, enrichment technology, and reprocessing technology. Exploration of uranium has been carried out by PNC's predecessor since 1956. About 6 000 tonnes U3Oa of uranium reserves have been identified in Japan. However, the uranium activities of PNC mainly involve overseas exploration in such countries as Australia and Canada.

158 Japan

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

There are several districts where exist uranium deposits in the tertiary sandstone formation in Japan. However most of the deposits are too small to be separately reported for the Red Book, with the exception of the deposits in the Tono district and the Ningyo-Toge districts. Total reserve (RCR) recoverable under the cost of $130/kg U is estimated as 6 600 tonnes U of which 60 per cent is from the Tono deposits and 25 per cent form the Ningyo-Toge deposits.

The domestic uranium exploration in Japan ended in 1988. Since then, the Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation (PNC) - government owned company - concentrated its effort of uranium exploration on overseas exploration - especially in the north America (mainly Canada), Australia and other countries (China, Niger, Zimbabwe, RCA).

DISTRIBUTION OF MAJOR GRANITIC BODIES AND URANIUM DEPOSITS IN JAPAN

159 Japan

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - ABROAD (Government)

YEAR In Yens InUSS 1988 2 848 000 000 21410 000

1989 2 232 000 000 15 677 000 1990 2 192 000 000 14 234 000

1991* 2 057 000 000 15 125 000

Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Japan reported uranium resources in the Reasonably Assured Resource (RAR) and Estimated Additional Resource Category I (EAR-I) categories as follows:

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U between $80-130/kg U up to S80/kg U between $80-130/kg U - 6600 - -

As recoverable resources.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Japan currently has no domestic uranium production facilities. Some studies had been launched in earlier years on the possibility of extracting uranium from sea water. Several promising materials were discovered, however, the techniques did not appear to be cost-competitive with current uranium production methods and thus R&D for sea water extraction of uranium was ceased in 1989.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 Conventional Mining 87 0 0 0 87 0

160 Japan

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

The Government of Japan reported the installed nuclear generating capacities and annual reactor- related requirements listed in the tables below. The Secretariat additionally notes that as of January 1st, 1991, Japan had 41 nuclear power plants connected to the grid with ten more units currently under construction. Given the current and expected construction programme, the Secretariat estimates that installed nuclear generating capacity will reach 57 100 MWe and 69 200 MWe in the years 2005 and 2010 respectively. The corresponding annual reactor-related uranium requirements would be about 12 000 tonnes U and 15 000 tonnes U for the years 2005 and 2010 respectively.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

31 500 33 300 35 200 37 000 38 100 40 700 53 000 - -

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

6 900 7 100 7 300 7600 7 800 8000 9 200 - -

URANIUM STOCKS AND INVENTORIES

The Japanese Government maintains no uranium stocks. The Secretariat notes that no information on utility stocks was reported for this edition of the Red Book.

NATIONAL POLICIES

Since 1975, there has been no differentiation between uranium and other minerals under the Japanese Mining laws and regulations. The uranium exploration and exploitation is open to private companies incorporated in Japan, however, no private company has been interested in the domestic uranium exploration in Japan. There were no uranium-related policy changes in Japan in 1989 and 1990.

URANIUM PRICES

Uranium import prices are contracted by private companies. This data is not available to government.

161 • Jordan •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Exploration

The Natural Resources Authority (NRA) financed with funds from the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources continued uranium exploration in those areas outlined by an earlier airborne radiometric survey, which covered the entire country.

Areas explored in 1989-90 were those underlain by Prccambrian basement and Ordovician sandstones. In detail, the following investigations were carried out:

1. Geological: regional mapping at 1 : 50 000 scale of the Prccambrian basement was completed; ground checking of all airborne anomalies in areas underlain by Precambrian basement rocks and Ordovician sandstones.

2. Gcochemical: regional prospection using mainly stream sediment sampling and some rock sampling, was done over 75 per cent of the Precambrian area; the obtained samples were analysed for total and mobile U.

3. Radiometric: smaller scale spectrometry over areas covered by Precambrian rocks as well as ground follow up over airborne radiometric anomalies, located mainly in areas underlain by Ordovician sandstones.

Plans for the 1991 programme include the continuation of the regional gcochcmical prospection over the remaining Precambrian basement complex, as well as geological follow-up in areas of interest.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In Jordan Dinar InUSS 1988 60 000 163 000 1989 72 000 120 000 1990 55 000 83 000 1991* 20 000 29 000

Planned.

162 i

• Republic of Korea •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The Republic of Korea through various organisations is conducting both domestic and foreign uranium exploration.

The Korea Institute of Energy and Resources (KIER) in 1989 and 1990 carried out exploration in the two domestic areas of Gongju and Munkyeong. In Gongju, uraniferous graphite layers intercalated in hornfels metamorphics and in Munkyeong uraniferous granites and highly potassic volcanics were the exploration targets.

The Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) responsible for foreign uranium exploration as part of its programme to assure future fuel supply, participates in a number of projects; the Nord Lcyou Joint Venture in Gabon which had been dormant since 1985, was formally terminated in 1988; in the Crow Butte in situ leaching project in Nebraska, USA, KEPCO holds a 10 per cent share; in Saskatchewan, Canada, KEPCO participates in the Cigar Lake and Dawn Lake projects with 2 and 4.5 per cent respectively and in Hcnday Lake with 20 per cent interest.

In addition to KEPCO's foreign interests, Dae Woo participates with a share of 1 per cent in the Kiggavik project, Northwest Territories, Canada.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC

YEAR Million Won In USS

1988 50 68 000

1989 50 75 000

1990 30 43 000

1991* 25 35 000

Planned.

163 Republic of Korea

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - ABROAD

YEAR InUSS Country

1988 48 000 Canada, Gabon, USA 1989 108 000 Canada, USA

1990 158 000 Canada, USA 1991* 146 000 Canada, USA 1 1 Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

The Republic of Korea is reporting known uranium resources in black shales of Ogcheon, as listed in the following table.

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U up to S80/Kg U between S80-130/kg U

- 11 800 •- 3 000

As in situ resources.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

KEPCO's uranium procurement strategy to fill current and future reactor related requirements consists of a mix of spot and near term purchases, medium and long term contracts and through the participation in uranium mining projects.

At present, KEPCO operates 8 nuclear power plants, consisting of 7 pressurised water reactors and one pressurised hcav y water moderated and cooled reactor of the Candu-type. Their aggregate nuclear electricity generating capacity, future capacity projection as well as current and projected uranium requirements arc listed in the following tables.

164 Republic of Korea

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY [GW(e)l

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

7.6* 7.6* 7.6* 7.6* 7.6* 8.6 14.7 14.7 14.7

Gross capacities reported. Net capacity estimated by Secretariat at 7 220 MWe based on IAEA PRIS.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

1 158 1 233 1 766 1 396 1 570 2 157 2 098 2 098 2 098

URANIUM STOCKS AND INVENTORIES

KEPCO is required to carry stocks in form of natural and enriched uranium of six months forward demand. At present, KEPCO's stocks are below this level. It is expected that the required quantities will be reached at the end of 1992. Total uranium stocks held by KEPCO arc summarized in the following table.

TOTAL URANIUM STOCKS (Tonnes Natural U-equivalent)

Holder Natural Uranium Enriched Uranium Depleted Uranium Stocks Stocks Slocks

Utility 540 300 5 TOTAL 540 300 5

URANIUM PRICES

The following uranium prices were reported referring to the weighted average for deliveries under long-term contracts.

YEAR In USS (lb U,08) In USS (kg U) 1988 32.84 85.38

1989 25.55 66.43 1990 23.40 60.84

165 • Malaysia •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The Geological Survey of Malaysia continued uranium exploration through 1989 - 90 in KcJantan, Pahang, Perak and Terengganu, where numerous uranium anomalies in stream sediment samples had been found. A preliminary follow-up survey at the Sok area, Kelantan, revealed the presence of some uraninite bearing shear zones in a granitoid, as well as a quartz vein containing the uranium minerals rhabdophane and florencite.

In 1991, a detailed investigation of the uranium mineralisation in the Kanateh area, Kelantan, is being done. Information was not available on exploration expenditures in 1990 and expected for 1991.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR InUSS

1988 680 000 1989 684 000

1990 NA

1991 NA

• Mexico •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Uranium exploration had ceased in May 1983 and URAMEX, the organisation responsible for this activity, was dissolved in February 1985. Some of its responsibilities have been taken over by the Mineral Resources Board (Consejo dc Recursos Minerales).

166 Mexico

URANIUM RESOURCES

The submitted resource estimates are based on the results of the investigation and resource appraisals made in 1982.

As listed in the following tables, both conventional and unconventional resources occur in Mexico.

KNOWN URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

1 REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES (RAR)

Recoverable ai costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130/kg U - 1 700

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130/kg U - 700

As in situ resources.

UNDISCOVERED URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category II (EAR-II)

Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130Ag U - 2 700

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES (SR) Recoverable at costs up to S130/kg U Cost Category Unassigncd - 10 000

In addition there arc unconventional resources in marine phosphates in Baja California totalling 150 000 tonnes U, as well «s approximately 1 000 tonnes U, which previously were listed as conventional resources, associated with hydrothcrmal non-ferrous mineralisation in Tayata (Oaxaca), Nochc Bucna (Sonora) and La Prcciosa (Durango).

167 Mexico

URANIUM PRODUCTION

In the period 1969 - 1971, the Mining Development Commission operated a plant in Villa Aldama, Chihuahua, to recover molybdenum and by-product uranium from ores mined in the Sierra de Gomez and other occurrences including Domitila (Pefia Blanca). A total of 49 tonnes U was produced.

At present, there are no plans for any uranium production in the foreseeable future.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

The current and future uranium requirements are based upon the two nuclear reactors, Laguna Verde-1 and -2. Both are BWR with a nuclear generating capacity of 654 MW(e). Laguna Verde-1 started commercial operation in July 1990, while Laguna Verde-2 currently under construction is expected to start commercial production in late 1993.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY [MW(c)l

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 654 654 654 1 308 1 308 1 308 1 308 1 308 1 308

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 111 120 92 192 204 186 180 180 180

At present, there is a stock of 220 tonnes U as uranium hexafluoridc held at U.S. DOE and 28.5 tonnes U as uranium hcxafluoride at Comurhex. This compares with a 10 tonnes U as hexafluoride at U.S. DOE and 28.5 tonnes U as hexafluoride at Comurhex, prior to March 1990.

It is the policy of the National Electricity Utility (CFE) to carry stocks equivalent to two years forward reactor consumption. Currently the utility stocks are at this level.

168 Mexico I Netherlands

URANIUM PRICES

Recently, there were the following three spot purchases made, for which details are given below.

Date Amount (t U)* Price (S/kg U)** 3/1990 116.0 36.00

9/1990 111.8 37.30 3/1991 97.8 37.30

* U as UF6 ** Includes financing.

NATIONAL POLICIES RELATED TO URANIUM

It was the initial policy in Mexico, to fuel the reactor with indigenous uranium. Due to the low uranium prices the national uranium company URAMEX ceased operation in the early 1980s and it was decided to purchase the uranium needed for the first nuclear power plant either on the spot market or under medium-long term contracts. Nevertheless, there is an interest to continue the evaluation of Mexico's uranium resources and production potential.

• Netherlands •

URANIUM EXPLORATION, RESOURCES, AND PRODUCTION

The Netherlands has no uranium resources and is not currently undertaking any uranium exploration. In 1986 it was reported that the Dutch Fertilizer Industry imports yearly marine phosphates from several locations around the world. These phosphates contain a recoverable quantity of 50-100 tonnes U. This production possibility reportedly becomes viable at market prices around $120/kg U.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

The Netherlands currently maintains two nuclear reactors connected to the grid. These arc the Borssele PWR reactor (481 MWc gross) and the Dodewaard BWR reactor (58 MWc gross). As of January, 1991, no decision had yet been taken on whether to extend the operation of the reactors beyond the turn of the century.

169 Netherlands

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 508 508 508 508 508 508 452 - -

Note: The Secretariat estimates that the Borssele unit (452 MWe net) will be extended through 2010 to meet the country's energy requirements.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

95 95 95 95 95 95 85 - -

NATIONAL POLICIES

There are no special national policies relating to uranium. Utilities have the main responsibility for managing uranium. In past years, utilities have committed themselves not to import uranium from South Africa and Namibia.

URANIUM STOCKS

The Dodewaard nuclear power station seeks to maintain about a 5 reactor year forward stock of uranium, while Borssele seeks to maintain a 1-2 year forward stock level. Presently, Dodcwaard is above this target level while Borssele is below it.

It should be noted in the following table that for natural uranium stocks in concentrates, the total figure includes 375 tonnes uranium owned by the Dutch Electricity Generating Board. This is a stockpile which has existed since approximately 1980 and which was created while anticipating an expanded national nuclear capacity. Since that time, the utilities consider this to be a strategic stockpile.

TOTAL URANIUM STOCKS AS OF THE END OF 1990 (Tonnes Natural U-cquivaleni)

Natural uranium Enriched Depleted Reprocessed Holder slocks in uranium uranium uranium concentrates stocks stocks stocks Producer 825 Utility 429 18 6

TOTAL 429 18 825 6

170 Netherlands I Niger

PRICES

Information on uranium pricing is not available at this time.

• Niger •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Uranium exploration in 1989 and 1990 had concentrated on the evaluation of the Akola deposit by the Compagnie Miniere d'Akouta (COMINAK). This deposit located north of the Akouta properly, occurs at the base of the Mississipian Gue/ouman formation. The work had included wider spaced drilling on grids of 100 x 50 m in the northwest and southeast parts of the deposit. Of a total of 171 drill holes, 114 had positive results.

Exploration expenditures continued to be in the US$4 - 5 million range through 1989, but declined in 1990, to about US$1.5 million.

Plans for 1991 include the continuation of the investigation of the Akola deposit. Drilling is projected to be in smaller spaced grids of 50 x 50 m. The planned exploration expenditures are over US$1 million.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In F/CFA* In USS*

1988 1 419.40 4.788 1989 1 499.39 4.697 1990 401.00 1.472 1991** 318.03 1.100

* In million F/CFA and USS. ** Planned.

171 Niger

URANIUM RESOURCES

The known resources, including Reasonably Assured Resources and Estimated Additional Resources - Category I are contained in the deposits Arlit, Ami, Akola, Imouraren, Afasto-Ouest and Abkrorum in grades ranging up to 0.46 per cent. Three companies, Soci&e" des Mines de I'Air (SOMAIR), Compagnie Miniere d'Akouta (COMINAK) and Soci&e" des Mines Tassa N'Taghalgue control about 50 per cent of these resources.

The estimates of the RAR and EAR-I recoverable at costs up to $130/kg U are listed in the following tables.

KNOWN URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U) REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES (RAR)

Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130/kg U

166 070 6 650

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130/kg U 295 770 10 000

As in situ resources.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Niger's uranium production is being produced by SOMAIR and COMINAK. The combined production capability is 3 700 tonnes U, the production statistics are compiled in the following table.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 Conventional Mining 41 936 2 965 2 962 2 831 50 695 2 960

SOMAIR is owned 36.6 per cent by national interests, the remaining 63.4 per cent being foreign owned, while COMINAK corresponding ownership shares arc 31 percent and 69 percent, respectively.

172 Niger I Norway I Peru

The employment in existing production centres is summarized in the following table.

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years)

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991 3 552 3 541 3 295 3 243 3 203 3 023 2 557

The production capability projection for Niger continues to remain at 3 700 tonnes U/year supported by known resources recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U, through the year 2010.

• Norway •

URANIUM EXPLORATION, RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND

Norway reports that there are no known Reasonably Assured, Estimated Additional, or Speculative uranium resources in the country. Additionally, there has been no recent uranium exploration activities or exploration expenditures domestically or abroad. There is no production or commercial uranium demand in Norway with the exception of a small research reactor which requires about 0.25 tonnes U/year. There is accordingly no fixed procurement strategy other than to buy uranium as needed. No increase in uranium demand is foreseen over the short term. Uranium stocks arc negligible.

• Peru •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The Peruvian Nuclear Energy Institute (IPEN) in 1989 and 1990 continued surface exploration of the Chapi prospect in the Macusani area. Ft was planned to use some of the mineralized material recovered from trenches for ore processing tests to be carried out in Puno.

173 Peru

Plans for 199. call for the invitation of private companies to continue exploration of the Chapi prospect, as well as of other uranium prospects in Peru.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In INTI* InUSS

1988 10.85 46 000 1989 57.86 15 000

1990 10 390.00 60 000 1991** 35 440.00 71 000

In million Intis. Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

The conventional uranium resources of Peru are mainly located in the Macusani area, Department of Puno. Geologically, the uranium mineralisation is associated with acid volcanics of Mio - Pliocene age, underlain by Palaeozoic basement rocks.

Within the Macusani area there are a number of uranium prospeas referred to as Chapi, Chilcuno VI, Pinocho, Cerro Concharrumio and Ccrro Calvario.

At Chapi, which seems to be the most important prospect, mineralisation consists of pitchblende, gummite, autunite, meta-autunite, etc., filling subvertical and subhorizontal fractures. These fractures are concentrated over a width of 15 - 90 m and a thickness of 20 - 30 m. The grades range between 0.03 and 0.75 per cent with an average of 0.1 per cent U.

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U between S8O-130/kg U up to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U

1 790 - 1 720 140

As in situ resources.

174 Peru I Portugal

In addition to the above known resources, SR are estimated in the unexplored portions of the Chapi, Chilcuno VI, Pinocho, Cerro Concharrumio and Cerro Calvario prospects, as well as for the wider Macusani area.

SPECULATIVE URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

Recoverable at costs Cost Category Unassigned Total up to 5130/kg U

26 450 - 26 450

Unconventional resources are estimated for the phosphorite deposit of Bayovar, Piura, as well as for a number of non-ferrous metal deposits (Turmalina, Sayapuyo, Colquijirca, Restauradora, Vilcabamba, Mercedes). The resources in the phosphorite deposit constitute the majority of the unconventional resources. Based on a grade of 90 ppm the total resources amount to about 20 000 tonnes U, while those contained in the non-ferrous metal deposits mentioned above total 20 - 460 tonnes U.

NATIONAL POLICIES

IPEN is the national organisation responsible to the Ministry of Energy and Mines for all nuclear energy related matters. At present, according to the uranium law (D.L.23 112 of 1980) IPEN is authorized by the Ministry of Energy and Mines to invite private capital for the further exploration and if justified, for the exploitation of the uranium prospects in the Macusani area.

• Portugal •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

During 1989 and 1990, the Dircc^ao-Geral dc Gcologia e Minas (DGGM) and the Emprcsa Nacional dc Uranio S.A. (ENU), continued their exploration activities in Portugal. Over the last two years the exploration activities of DGGM and ENU have declined. In 1991, ENU planned to concentrate on its exploration permits which amount to about 1 750 km2. DGGM, on the other hand, planned lo have a reduced general exploration programme covering an area of 400 km2 and a detailed exploration programme covering an area of about 50 km2 (including radiometric and trenches).

175 Portugal

The following tables summarise the recent exploration activities:

GENERAL EXPLORATION METHOD 1989 1990

Radiometric 153 km2 200 km2

1 DETAILED EXPLORATION METHOD 1989 1990

Radiometric 38.2 ha 18.0 ha VLF 26.0 ha 32.5 ha

Emanometric 32.7 ha Drilling 250 = 12 055 m 49 = 1 901 m

Portugal reported no exploration expenditures abroad from 1988 through 1990 and none were expected in 1991. Domestic expenditures are listed below:

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC

A - Industry expenditures

YEAR InUSS

1988 990 000

1989 814 000 1990 700 000 1991* 350 (XX)

B - Government expenditures

YEAR InUSS 1988 220 000 1989 140 000

1990 36 000

1991* 235 (XX)

Planned.

176 Portugal

URANIUM DEPOSITS AND OCCURENCES IN PORTUGAL

*C a w ENU uranium D exploration araaa • Uranium extraction plant A Uranium or* depoaitt 1 < Alorc 2 Cunha Bolxa 3 • Frauioaa 4 Plnhal do Souio S • Quinta do Blipo Cabanaa e7 Caatalajo 6 Joio Ando 9 Boritga to tUca 11 N>»« P0BTAL6GRE 12 • Mala 13 • Palhalro* Tolosa 14 Tarabau 15 Totota 16 Alio do Corgo 17 HortadaVllarlca

whm

177 Portugal

URANIUM RESOURCES

Known Conventional Resourcs (RAR)

Known uranium deposits are located in the Central-Iberian geotectonic area. They occur in Hercynian granite batholiths or in exocontact meta-sediments in structural highs. As of January, 1991, Portugal reports the following resources:

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I) Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U between S80-130/kg U up to $80/kg U between S80-l30/kg U 7 300 1400 1450 0

A considerable potential for further vein type and Iberian type uranium deposits has been amply demonstrated during many years of continued exploration. Resources in the EAR-II and Speculative categories were estimated and are shown in the following tables:

ADDITIONAL CONVENTIONAL RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

EST!' TED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category II (EAR-H) Recoverable at , up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130/kg U 1 500 0

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES (SR) Recoverable at costs up to S130/kg U Cost Category Unassigncd 5 000 None reported

178 Portugal

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Status of Production Capability

At present, the Urgeirica production centre is operating and has a nominal production capacity of 170 tonnes U per year. Since 1987 production has been increased by 20-25 per cent as a result of capacity expansion at the Urgeiriqa Mine and productivity gains through concentration on open pit operations. The contribution of production from in situ leach operations has also increased. The production of yellow cake in 1990 amounted to 111 tonnes U. However due to the depressed market situation and financial constraints only the heap leaching is under exploitation and the production for 1991 was expected to fall to 32 tonnes U.

HISTORICAL URANIUM PRODUCTION AS OF THE END OF 1990 (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 through 1990 1991 Conventional Mining NA 115 86 79 NA 0 In-Situ Leaching NA 24 9 I NA 0 Other Methods NA 20 33 31 NA 32

TOTAL 3 114 159 128 111 3 512 32

NA Not available.

Ownership Structure of the Uranium Industry

All mining and milling activities are currently entrusted to Emprcsa Nacional dc Uranio (ENU, EP). This is a fully state owned company which also carries out uranium exploration in the areas surrounding present and future mining sites. The Direc?ao-Geral dc Gcologia e Minas is responsible frw carrying out a general exploration programme.

OWNERSHIP OF URANIUM PRODUCTION

DOMESTIC FOREIGN TOTALS

Government Private Government Private ItUl [tUl [%1 [lUl '%l ItUl HU| l%l 418 61 238 36

179 Portugal

Employment in the Uranium Industry

Employment in Portugal's uranium industry has declined slowly but steadily over the last decade. The employment in 1980 was approximately 614 person-years whereas in 1989 employment had dropped to 450 person-years. The employment dropped off much more dramatically in 1990 to 231 person-years and was estimated to dip to just 80 person-years by the end of 1991.

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Yean

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991 535 519 506 487 460 450 231 80

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

Portugal operates one small research reactor but no commercial power reactors. Accordingly, the national uranium requirements are negligible and no significant changes are envisaged over the short tenn.

NATIONAL POLICIES RELATING TO URANIUM

Portugal reported no changes to uranium policies since those described in the 1989 Red Book.

TOTAL URANIUM STOCKS AS OF THE END OF 1990 (Tonnes Natural U-equivalent)

Natural uranium Enriched Depleted Reprocessed Holder slocks in uranium uranium uranium concentrates stocks stocks stocks Government 418 Producer 238 »

TOTAL 656

180 • Romania •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Historical Review

Uranium exploration started in 1950, and in 1951 an exceptional high grade deposit in Permian sandstones was discovered in the Apuseni mountains, being a part of the western Carpathians, in the western part of the country.

Subsequent exploration led to the discovery of a uranium province in the Apuseni mountains, consisting of the following deposit types:

- veins in metamorphic rocks, with uranium associated with cobalt, nickel, copper, lead and zinc; - stratiform deposits related to metarhyolites, where uranium occurs with molybdenum and occasionally with lead and zinc; - tabular sandstone deposits associated with low grade copper mineralisation.

Further work in the country discovered a second uranium district, located in the Banat mountains in the southwestern part of Romania. The uranium in this district occurs in sandstone type deposits in general associated with anthroxolite, i.e. with asphaltite.

In the time 1961 - 1962 a third uranium province was found. It is located in the eastern pan of the Carpathian mountains in east-northeastern Romania. The uranium occurs as pitchblende veins in metamorphic rocks, mainly schists. It is associated with bitumen and the host rock shows a clay- carbonate hydrothermal alteration.

Present and Ongoing Activities

Uranium exploration is continuing both in the known districts and in areas without known resources, using classical exploration tools. In addition, all prospects, mines and drill holes for minerals other than uranium arc investigated for their uranium favourability.

URANIUM RESOURCES

The present Reasonably Assured Resources of the three uranium districts in Romania, the Apuscni mountains, the Banat and the eastern Carpathians are estimated to total 18 000 tonnes U, unassigncd to any cost category. Estimated Additional Resources - Category I, also unassigned to any cost category, are reported to amount to 8 000 tonnes U.

181 Romania

The pre-production resources of the deposits in the Apuseni and Banat mountains are reported to total 24 500 - 26 000 tonnes U in ores grading 1.2 per cent in the Apuseni district and between 0.1 - 0.2 per cent U in the deposits of the Banat mountains. Information on the resources of the eastern Carpathian district arc not available.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Uranium mining is being done in three mines, one in each of the three uranium districts. The exact location and names of the production cf.ntres, however, are not available. Mining is done exclusively by underground mining methods. The present production is approximately 250 tonnes U, which due to unfavourable geological conditions is reported to be high cost.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

The Ministry of Electrical Energy is constructing five nuclear power plants in Cernavoda, referred to as Cernavoda 1 - 5. All units are of the PHWR (Candu) type, each with an electricity generating capacity of 625 MW(e). The construction of these plants started in 1980,1982, 1984, 1985, and 1986. Their commercial operation is expected to start in 1993, 1995, 1997, 1998 and 1999.

Based on this time schedule, the nuclear capacity and reactor related uranium requirements are projected as shown in the following tables.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY* (MW(e)]

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 - - - 625 625 1 250 3 125 3 125 3 125

Secretariat estimate.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS* (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 - 75 75 150 150 225 375 375 375

Secretariat estimate.

182 • South Africa •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

No exploration was carried out in South Africa during 1989 and 1990 which was aimed at uranium as a primary or secondary target. Ongoing exploration for gold in the Witwatersrand Basin has resulted in the discovery of by-product uranium. The low level of interest in uranium is shown by the fact that, in many cases, uranium analyses are no longer carried out.

In 1990, expenditures on gold exploration in the Witwatersrand Basin amounted to about Rand 400 million. Some by-product uranium was discovered during these activities, but none of this expenditure can be considered to be applied to uranium exploration, because uranium levels arc not a factor in assigning priorities to exploration targets.

URANIUM RESOURCES

A major proportion (79 per cent) of the uranium resources in South Africa occurs together with gold in quartz-pebble conglomerates of the Witwatersrand Basin. The remainder occurs in coal scams and in carbonatitc-hostcd copper deposits, as well as in sandstones of the Karoo Supergroup.

During 1989 and 1990 no significant uranium discoveries have been made in South Africa.

The uranium resources of South Africa (RAR and EAR-I recoverable at costs of up to $130/kg U) were re-estimated as at 1 January 1989. This resulted in lower estimates for these resources and a shifting of certain portions into higher cost categories as a consequence of escalating costs coupled with relatively sialic gold and uranium prices.

For the determination of the uranium resource cosl categories a gold price of $420/oz and an exchange rate of Rand 2.35 = $1.00 were used. Given the current state of the gold market it is likely that the next resource estimate will show a significant drop in uranium resources.

South Africa reported RAR, EAR-1 as well as undiscovered resources (EAR-II and SR), which are listed in the following tabics.

18.1 South Africa

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES** ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I) Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U between S80-13O/kg U up to S80/kg U between S80-130/kgU 253 100 96 800 51 800 30 800

* All resource estimates are as recoverable resour^s. ** Original estimates as of 1st January 1989, adjusted for production.

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category II (EAR-II) Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130/kg U 30 800 37 700

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES (SR) Recoverable at iosts up to S130/kg U Cost Category Unassigncd - 1 113 000

URANIUM PRODUCTION

South Africa's uranium production capability has been declining steadily and markedly since 1983, and is now at its lowest level since 1954. Between 1984 and 1988 the following seven uranium producers have ceased operation:

in 1984 Blyvoorzuitzicht and St. Helena (Beisa); in 1985 Western Deep Levels; in 1988 Dricfontein, Randfontein, Harmony and Chcmwcs.

At the end of 1990, Frcegold, previously referred to as ERGO ceased uranium production, and Vaal Reefs suspended one of its three plants temporarily and reduced production of the second plani by 50 per cent.

Currently available production capacity is about 2 500 tonnes U/ycar, but this includes the plants shut down in 1990. It is still undecided if they will be converted or dismantled in the near future, which would reduce the country's production capacity to about 1 900 tonnes U/ycar.

184 South Africa

The operating uranium recovery plants are owned by private sector companies. The government has no direct involvement in the commercial side of the uranium industry in South Africa.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 By-Product 130 770 3 800 2 943 2 487 140 000 1 750 Production

The production capability projection includes planned and projected capabilities of 4 370 tonnes U in 1995, increasing to 6 470 tonnes in 2000,7 420 tonnes in 2005 and 8 990 tonnes U/year in the year 2010. These production capabilities would all be sustained by known resources of the up to $130/kg U cost category.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

In South Africa there are two PWR type 921 MW(e) nuclear power plants, Koebcrg 1 and 2 since 1984 and 1985 respectively, in operation. Their aggregate reactor related requirements arc estimated at 270 tonnes U/year.

NATIONAL POLICIES

The Nuclear Energy Act, 1982, as amended, contains the legislation concerning the uranium indusfy in South Africa. In addition, mining laws and generally applicable regulations arc of relevance to the uranium industry. The implementation of this legislation is under the control of the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs, but in the uranium industry the Minister's functions are exercised by the chairman of the Atomic Energy Corporation of South Africa.

The government has no direct participation in the uranium industry in South Africa, except in a regulatory and consultative capacity.

185 • Spain •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Uranium exploration has been continued in the hercynian massif (western Spain). ENUSA (Empresa Nacional del Uranio, S.A.) maintains a level of activities similar to previous years. Exploration has been concentrated in the precambrian-cambrian schists around Mina FE (Salamanca province) and within a 15 km radius, where a number of anomalies and orebodies at different stages of investigation exists.

Exploration work carried out during 1989-90 include helicoptcrbome geophysics (E.M., VLF, mag, gamma-spectrometry), orientated to help in the interpretation of the complex tectonics of the zone as well as for the detection of conductive and magnetometry deducted structures. Ground work include detailed geological mapping, radiometrics at close spacing and emanomctry where a moderate overburden is found. Ground VLF is also being used with varying results. As consequence of the evaluation carried out by means of precussion drilling at ZONA D (Southern extension of Mina FE), M-SAGERAS (Northwestern extension of FE) and ESPERANZA (15 km NW from FE) deposits of about 2 855 tonnes U of "situ' resources have been discovered.

For 1991 the exploration expenditure in Salamanca Province will be raised by 30 per cent, that will be spent mainly in geophysics and drilling. Work will be carried out mainly on the evaluation of the ESPERANZA deposit, and on the investigation of the partially studied CARPIO, GALLEGOS and MARIALBA zones, with special interest on potential mineralised schists under shallow tertiary covering.

Exploration in the Extremadura (Cfcercs, Badajoz) region is being carried out by a new Joint Venture between ENUSA and CISA. The latter company is the operator and a subsidiary of the French company COGEMA in Spain. The exploration area (7 500 km2) is over precambrian-cambrian schists and calcalcaline porphyritic granites of hercynian massif.

Exploration work carried out during 1989-90 includes a compilation of documentation on previous work, a computer reprocessing of ENUSA airborne surveys (gamma-spec '.rometry and magnetometry), a stream sediment and water gcochemical survey. These regional studies have led to defining interest areas both in schist and granites (Albuquerque, Cabeza de Araya, Trujillo, Albala). Detailed studies on known anomalies include radiometry, geophysics (VIF), trenching, diamond drilling and percussion drilling in two of the known ore bodies. Activities will be continued during 1991 including the beginning of exploration work on a new area (2 900 km2) situated in the eastern Ciccrcs and western Toledo Provinces.

186 Spain

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - DOMESTIC

YEAR In Pesetas InUSS 1988 142 400 000 1 224 000 1989 223 300 000 1 881 000 1990 258 400 000 2 523 000 1991* 341 500 000 3 222 000

Planned.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Known Conventional Resources (RAR & EAR-I)

During 1989-1990 new resources have been discovered on extensions of the ZONA D, M-SAGERAS and EXPERANZA deposits of the Ciudad Rodrigo area (Salamanca Province, Spain).

All resources arc from "Iberian type" deposits hosted in precambrian-cambrian schists. Although no age estimation has been made, the mineralisation is similar to that of FE mine and ALAMEDA, that has been dated as Tcrciary (37 m.y.).

The overall grade is low and similar to that of the FE mine (about 0.7 per cent). At the individual mineralised breccias, however, the grade can be high (i.e., above 1 per cent).

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I) Recoverable at costs Recoverable at cosis Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U between 580-130/kg U up to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U 17 850 21 150 0 9 (XX)

187 Spain

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Status of Production Capability

The production facility which is situated at the FE mine in Salamanca Province is presently working very near its authorised maximum production level. It provides most of the national output of 213 tonnes 'J per year. Production in the other facility, situated at La Haba in Badajoz Province, has been reduced during 1990 and was to be stopped in 1991. Production capability was expected to rise to 850 tonnes U per year with the start of a new production plant, already under construction at FE mine.

Ownership Structure of the Uranium Industry

Both existing production centres belong to the Empresa Nacional del Uranio (ENUSA) a private company owned 60 per cent by the Instituto Nacional de Industria (INI) and 40 per cent by the Centro de Investigacioncs Encrgdticas Mcdioambientales y Tecnologicas (CIEMAT).

During 1990 employment in the uranium production centres has been reduced from 309 to 273, as production in La Haba centre has been rcductcd and finally stopped.

OWNERSHIP OF URANIUM PRODUCTION

Future Production Centres

No new centre is to be opened in the near future, but as staled before a new plant is under construction at FE mine.

HISTORICAL URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 Conventional Mining 2 723 228 227 213 3 391 212

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years)

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Expected 1991

325 311 349 348 348 309 309 256

188 Spain

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

As of January, 1991, Spain was operating ten nuclear power reactors with a total net capacity of about 7 GWe and uranium requirements of aboi't 1 200 tonnes U/year. The fire at the Vandellos I (GCR) in 1989 caused its shutdown and it was retired permanently in 1990. There is a moratorium in effect affecting the construction of additional reactors. As a result of reducing the national nuclear programme, uranium supplies have exceeded requirements for some time. However, measures have been taken to reduce the over supply as much as feasible.

Supply and Procurement Strategy

Uranium requirements are expected to be relatively stable over the short term at about 1 200 tonnes U/year. The strategy for long-term uranium procurement is to substantially increase the portion which is covered by national uranium production (i.e., reduce imports).

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY TO 2010 (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 7 354 7 354 7 354 7 354 7 354 7 354 7 354 7 354 7 354

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS TO 2010 (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 1 123.5 1 232.7 971.4 1 300.9 1 099.8 1 497.6 1 242.9 1 242.9 1 242.9

URANIUM POLICIES

T he uranium import policy provides for diversification of supply sources. The Spanish legislation leaves uranium exploration and production open to national and foreign private companies.

URANIUM STOCKS

No information was reported on government, producer, or utility slock levels in Spain.

URANIUM PRICES

No information was reported on uranium prices in Spain.

189 • Sweden •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Sweden financed and carried out extensive exploration efforts from 1950 to 1981. The Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company also conducted limited exploration activities in 1985. Currently, however, there are no ongoing exploration activities in Sweden for uranium.

URANIUM RESOURCES

The overwhelming majority of Swedish uranium resources are contained in verv low grade deposits. An estimated 300 000 tonnes of uranium could be mined.

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U between $80-130/kg U up to S80/kg U between S80-I30/kg U

2000 2000 1 000 5 300

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Sweden currently produces no uranium.

190 Sweden Si URANIUM DEPOSITS AND OCCURRENCES IN SWEDEN

191 Sweden

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991

Conventional Mining 200 0 0 0 200 0

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

Sweden's twelve operating reactors generated about 50 per cent of the country's electrical power in 1990. There are no reactors under construction. In January, 1991, an agreement on energy policy was reached by three parties in Parliament: the Social Democrats, the Liberal Pany and the Center Party. In June, 1991, Parliament decided on guidelines for energy policy, based on the three-party agreement. In October, 1991, the new government has declared that this "energy agreement" still applies. The agreement states that the juncture at which phase-out of nuclear power can begin and the rate at which it can proceed will depend on the results of electricity conservation measures, the supply of electricity from environmentally acceptable power production and the possibilities of maintaining international competitive electricity prices. The 1980 parliamentary decision that the last nuclear reactor should be closed down by 2010 has not been reconsidered.

The Swedish reactor-related requirements of uranium are around 1 500 tonnes U per year. There has been no significant changes in 1989 or in 1990.

The utilities are free to negotiate their own uranium purchases. They cooperate and coordinate purchases through the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company with most of their material coming from Australia and Canada. The main part of future requirements is covered by long term contracts for the next five years. Also, government permission is necessary for the import of uranium.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

9 880 9 880 9 880 9 880 9 880 9 880 - - -

192 Sweden

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 1400 1 500 1500 1 500 1 500 1 500 - - -

TOTAL URANIUM STOCKS (Tonnes natural U-equivalent)

Holder Natural Enriched Depleted Reprocessed uranium uranium uranium uranium stocks stocks stocks stocks Utility - 780 - -

TOTAL - 780 - -

NATIONAL POLICIES

No significant changes since 1989, however import from Namibia has been permitted since April 1, 1990. Import from South Africa is not allowed. No export of uranium is currently taking place in Sweden. Government permission is necessary for uranium exportation.

PRICES

The average cost of nuclear fuel to the Swedish utilities, including spent fuel disposal, was 0.0397 SEKAWh electricity. The part of this cost that corresponds to natural uranium, included in the cost above, was 0.007 SEKAWh electricity. These figures relate to 1990.

193 • Switzerland •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Background

In June 1979 the Federal Government decided to encourage uranium exploration by a grant of 1.5 million francs divided between the years 1980 to 1984. During 1980 and 1981 about 1000 m of galeries were excavated for prospection by a private company in the Hercynian Massif of Aiguilles Rouges and the surrounding gneisses. The limited work so far has not allowed a clear picture of the factors controlling the mineralisation which is of low grade and disseminated in an area which is geologically very complex.

In 1982 the Federal Government supported surface prospecting to the South of Iserables and drilling at Naters (Valais). Between 1982 and 1984, in the framework of the 5-year programme financed by the Federal Government, uranium exploration was carried out in the rugged region of the Penninic Bemhard nappe in the western Valais. The radiometric and chemical investigations concentrated mainly on the detrital deposits of Permo-carboniferous and schists of older age (series of Nendaz and the underlying series of Siviez). Owing to strong alpine tectonism the uranium is generally irregularly disseminated in the rock. Radioactive anomalies seem to be bound to the carbonatic and chloritic facies of the Nendaz scries, but their practical value could not be confirmed.

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Since 1985 all domestic exploration activities have been halted. Private industry, however, has engaged in uranium exploration in the USA (i.e., the Arizona Strip) since 1983. The expenditures for exploration in the USA are listed below:

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - ABROAD (Industry)

YEAR InUSS 1988 1 000 000 1989 500 000 1990 600 000 1991* 1 040 000

Planned.

194 Switzerland

URANIUM RESOURCES

No uranium resources have been reported for Switzerland.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Status of Production Capability

Switzerland does not produce uranium.

Future Production Centres

No future production centres in Switzerland are envisaged in the short term.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

Switzerland had five operating nuclear power stations located at Bcznau (Units 1 & 2), Muehlcbcrg, Goesgcn and Lcibstadt in 1991. Total installed net nuclear capacity was 2 630 MWe and the performance and safety record of these plants has been very good. In 1990, the plants' capacity factor averaged about 87 per cent. In September, 1990, a national referendum was held and the Swiss rejected an initiative to phase out the use of nuclear energy as soon as possible. This was the third time in ten years that the Swiss have voted against a phase-out of nuclear power. However, at the same time, the electorate did approve a ten year moratorium on the construction and operation of new plants.

Supply and Procurement Strategy

Switzerland reported that uranium is currently procured from one or several of the following sources:

- Partnership/Joint Venture production. - Long Term contracts. - Spot Market contracts.

195 Switzerland

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY TO 2010 (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

2 950 2 950 2 950 2 950 2 950 2 950 2 950 2 950 2 950

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS TO 2010 (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 570 570 570 570 570 570 570 570 570

URANIUM POLICIES

No changes to Swiss uranium policy were reported for this edition of the Red Book. Switzerland docs not produce uranium and does not export uranium. There is no official import policy as procurement is handled by private companies entirely. As regards uranium stocks, it is the policy of nuclear plant operating companies to maintain a stockpile of fresh fuel assemblies at the reactor site equivalent to the fuel requirement for 1 to 2 years.

URANIUM STOCKS

Switzerland reported a one year requirement in form of finished fuel assemblies.

196 • Thailand •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The Department of Mineral Resources in 1989 - 90 continued the evaluation of the nationwide airborne radiometric-magnetic-EM survey carried in the mid-eighties in co-operation with the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and its subcontractor Renting Earth Science International Ltd.

In detail the activities included the interpretation of the preliminary radiometric maps at 1 : 250 000 scale as well as ground follow-up applying geological mapping as well as spectrometer and geochemical surveying. The results obtained indicate that radiometric anomalies were caused by a large variety of sources such as Th-bearing biotite granites, rhyolites, andesitcs as well as laterites.

For 1991, the continuation of the verification of the radiometric anomalies in northern Thailand and related ground work are planned.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In Baht InUSS 1988 890 000 35 000 1989 690 000 27 000 1990 702 000 27 000 1991* 750 000 30 000

Planned.

197 • Turkey •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

No changes were reported in Turkey's Middle Anatolia prospecting and drilling activities from those described in the 1989 Red Book. Airborne radiometric surveys had been also previously reported for Central Anatolia.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In 1000 TL In USS 1988 567 000 205 000 1989 340 000 123 000 1990 200 000 72 000 1991 NA NA

NA Not available.

URANIUM RESOURCES

The resource estimates of the RAR category, recoverable at costs of below US$130/kg U have been revised upwards from 3 900 tonnes U in 1989 to 9 129 tonnes U in 1991. No EAR-I resources, however, were reported for this Red Book exercise whereas 3 222 tonnes U had been reported in 1989. A brief description of the resources is as follows:

Salihli-Koprubasi: Approximately 2 852 tonnes U in 10 ore bodies was reported at grades of 0.04 to 0.05 per cent U^, in fluviatile Neogene sediments.

Fakili: Approximately a 490 tonnes U in Neogene lacustrine sediments at an average grade of 0.05 per cent U308.

Kocarli: Resources were revised downwards for this deposit which occurs in a Neogene sediment. It contains 208 tonnes U at 0.05 per cent U308.

Avdin-Demirtepe: Resources were revised slightly upwards for this deposit which is emplaced in fracture zones in gneiss. It contains an estimated 1 729 tonnes U at 0.08 per cent U,08 grade.

Yczeat-Sorgun: Resources for this deposit in Eocene deltic lagoonal sediments were also revised upward to 3 850 tonnes U at 0.1 per cent grade U308.

198 URANIUM DEPOSITS AND OCCURRENCES IN TURKEY

BLACK SEA tf" ISTANBUL V ) Sebinkarahisar QANKARA Kifcukkuyu Eskisehir Yozgat-Sorgun (Tharyum) Salihli-K6pruba$i V # Fakili *

Demirtepe

k^P Koparli

/• \

MEDITERRANEAN SEA

100 200 300

Km Km Km Km I Turkey

A summary of the torrent resource position is given in the following table.

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U between S80-130/kgU up to S80/kg U between 580-130/kg U 9 129

As recoverable resources.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

A small pilot production plant operated in former years (1975-1982), however, no production was reported for the current period.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

At present, there arc no commercial nuclear power plants in Turkey and just two research reactors. Accordingly, uranium requirements are not significant. Although no nuclear plants arc currently under construction, Turkey forecasts that about 2 130 MWc of nuclear capacity will be installed by 2010.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY MWe

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 130

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 350*

Secretarial estimate.

200 • United Kingdom •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Despite some earlier systematic exploration, no significant uranium reserves are known to exist in the United Kingdom. Since 1983, all domestic exploration activities have been halted. Exploration in foreign countries is carried out by private companies operating through autonomous subsidiary or affiliate organisations established in the country concerned (e.g., members of the RTZ group of companies). These efforts are not reported in this issue of the Red Book. Exploration outside of the UK also has been carried out by the British Civil Uranium Procurement Organisation (BCUPO) on behalf of the UK civil users of uranium (e.g., Nuclear Electric and Scottish Nuclear). The BCUPO exploration effort in recent years was directed at upgrading existing properties in Canada and Malawi since BCUPO ceased its activities in Australia. In March, 1991, however, the British Civil Uranium Procurement Directorate and Organisation was disbanded by mutual agreement among the parties. Exploration projects which were managed by the former BCUPO are currently on hold and there arc no plans for any funher grass roots exploration activity. BCUPO historical expenditures for exploration abroad are listed in the table below along with expenditures which were estimated for the time frame of 1991 to 1992 just prior to disbanding BCUPO. There were no industry expenditures reported for domestic exploration from 1988 through 1991 nor were any government expenditures reported for exploration either domestic or abroad.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - ABROAD (BCUPO)

YEAR In£ InUSS 1988-89 .1600 000 6 406 000 1989-90 4 900 000 8 006 000 1990-91 1 100 000 1 950 (XX) 1991-92* 600 000 1 038 000

* On hold.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Despite some sideline mining of uranium in Cornwall during the 1800s, no uranium deposits have been located in the United Kingdom. Two districts, the Metallifcrrous Mining Region of SW England, and North Scotland, however, arc believed to contain some uranium resources. The reader is urged to consult the 1989 Red Book for more information on uranium resources in the United Kingdom.

201 United Kingdom

There have been no geological reappraisal of the UK uranium resources since 1980 and no significant discoveries have occurred since that time. The Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) and Estimated Additional Resources Category I (EAR-I) are essentially zero. There are small quantities of in-situ Estimated Additional Resources Category II (EAR-II) and Speculative Resources (SR).

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Status of Production Capability

The UK is not a uranium producer and is unlikely to become a uranium exporter in the foreseeable future.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

The United Kingdom currently maintains the fifth largest number of nuclear power plants operating in the world. In 1991, the 37 operating reactors in the United Kingdom with a combined net power capacity of 11 506 MW(e) provided approximately 20 per cent of the electricity generated in the UK. Eight reactors began commercial operation in 1989: Dungeness B2, Hartlepool Al, Hartlepool A2, Heysham 1 Unit A, Heysham 1 Unit B, Heysham 2 Unit A, Heysham 2 Unit B, and Tomess Unit B. Five reactors have recently been retired from service: Berkeley Unit 1, Berkeley Unit 2, Hunterston Al, Hunterston A2, and the Winfrith SGHWR.

One additional reactor is currently under construction. The construction of Nuclear Electric pic's 1 175 MW(e) Pressurised-Water Reactor (PWR) at Sizewell is ahead of target and progressing well. Fuel loading is expected to commence in November 1993 with commissioning in 1994. Initial planning approval was also given in 1990 to construct the Hinkley Point C PWR. However, will not proceed until the investment is approved by the government. Decisions on further PWR construction are not likely, however, until after a government review of nuclear power which will be held in 1994. Current estimates call for a small rise in nuclear capacity between 1991 and 1995 to 12 700 MWe, followed by a subsequent decline to 3 700 MWe by the year 20101.

As the world's first industrial scale nuclear power station at Calder Hall was celebrating its 35th year nuclear power generation, the main four companies in the UK nuclear industry, Nuclear Electric, Scottish Nuclear, BNFL and AEA, announced their intention to work together with the aim of reaching a common view on fast reactor development in the UK. Additionally, the lives of Hinkley Point B and Heysham 2 have been extended from 25 to 30 years and the lives of the Calder Hall and the Chapelcross reactors have been extended to 40 years.

1, The Secretariat has estimated that capacity may dip to as low as 9 400 MWe in 2000 and recover to about 10 200 by the year 2010 if a favourable decision towards nuclear power is made in 1994 (see OECD 1991 Brown Book: "Nuclear Energy Data 1991", Paris).

202 United Kingdom

URANIUM OCCURRENCES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM KEV

| I TERTIARY QUATERNARY

I C I CRETACEOUS

I J | JURASSIC

PERMO-TRIASSIC

|| 1111| CARBONIFEROUS

''.'.') DEVONIAN

CAMBRIAN -SILURIAN

PRECAMBRIAN (non-me (amorphic) METAMORPHIC ROCKS

IGNEOUS J acid ROCKS S basic

• •A- ANTICLINE

_2_ SYNCLINE

URANIUM OCCURRENCES

^ SANDSTONE

* VEIN

0 SYNGENETIC

I it-iui Poml 203 United Kingdom

Nuclear Electric's eight Magnox reactors at Bradwell, Dungeness A, Sizewell A and Hinkley Point A have been cleared for continued operation of 30 years, subject to final approval of their long term safety reviews. A recent study showed that there are no technical reasons why they could not be operated for 35 to 40 years. At the time of the report, Trawsfynydd was off load pending a safety case assessment. Nuclear Electric's Oldbury-1 magnox station beat the world record for continuous reactor operation achieving 713 days 21 hours and 32 minutes, beating the previous record of 700 days and seven hours.

Efforts continue in the UK to further demonstrate the safe decommissioning of nuclear plants and disposal of radioactive wastes. Nuclear Electric's Berkeley power station is now completely defuclled. Also, in July 1991, UK Nirex Ltd. announced that it had chosen Sellafield as the site at which it would concentrate its further investigations for the development of an underground repository for solid intermediate and low-level radioactive waste. Site investigations continued at Sellafield, with the drilling of further deep boreholes. In December, 1991, Nirex published its first site-specific design concept, for public consultation.

A reorganisation of Government departments is also expected whereby the Department of Energy will be merged into the Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of the Environment as appropriate.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY TO 2010 (MWe)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

11 900 11 5O0 11 500 11 500 12 700 12 400 9 700 8 700 3 700

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS TO 2010 (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

2 000 2 000 2 000 2 500 2000 1 800 1 600 1 300 500

Supply and Procurement Strategy

The twelve regional electricity distribution companies in the UK were privatised in 1990. The non-nuclear generators. National Power, PowcrGcn and Scottish Power were privatised in 1991. However, Nuclear Electric pic. (which operates the nuclear power plants of England and Wales) and Scottish Nuclear Ltd arc both currently owned by the UK government. These changes have led to new relationships between the former British Civil Uranium Procurement Organisation (BCUPO) member companies.

As noted previously, the British Civil Uranium Procurement Directorate and Organisation (BCUPO), which had formerly been responsible for uranium procurement lor the UK nuclear electricity

204 United Kingdom generation companies, were disbanded in March 1991. Nuclear Electric pic, Scottish Nuclear Ltd and BNFL are now responsible for their own uranium procurement arrangements.

Nuclear Electric reached an agreement with BNFL on the principal terms of a new commercial arrangement covering some £13 Billion worth of nuclear fuel services over the next 15 years. The agreements, effective from April 1989, cover the supply of fuel to Nuclear Electric's Magnox and AGR stations, reprocessing, treatment and storage of radioactive waste and decommissioning of associated fuel cycle facilities.

Scottish Nuclear reached an agreement with BNFL on the principal terms of a new commercial arrangement covering some £2.7 Billion worth of nuclear fuel services. This is similar to the agreement between BNFL and Nuclear Electric, except that Scottish Nuclear have opted for a dry store whilst maintaining open the possibility of reprocessing in the future rather than reprocessing immediately.

URANIUM POLICIES

No changes to uranium policy were reported by the United Kingdom. As regards, the current policy on participation of private and foreign companies, the UK Atomic Energy Act 1946 gives the Secretary of State wide ranging powers in relation to uranium resources in the UK, in particular to obtain information (Section 4) to acquire rights to work minerals without compensation (Section 7), to acquire uranium mined in the UK on payment of compensation (Section 8), and to introduce a licensing procedure to control or condition the working of uranium (Section 12A).

There are no specific policies relating to restrictions on foreign and private participation in uranium exploration, production, marketing and procurement in the United Kingdom nor exploration activities in foreign countries. There is no national stockpile policy in the UK. Utilities are free to develop their own policy.

Exports of uranium are subject to the Export of Goods (Control) Order 1970 (SI No. 1288), as amended, made under the Import, Export and Customs Powers (Defense) Act 1939.

URANIUM STOCKS

There have been no recent changes to utility stockpile practices. The United Kingdom past policy has been to maintain a stockpile equivalent to two years forward uranium requirements, provided adequate supply diversification has been achieved. In addition, the policy has been to hold a minor proportion of such stocks in the enriched form.

At present, stocks are above required levels. A general drawdown of inventory is expected in the UK until about 1995, when desired stock levels arc expected to be reached and maintained.

URANIUM PRICES

Uranium prices are commercially confidential in the United Kingdom.

205 • United States •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Uranium exploration and development activity in the United States has been at low levels for several years. Recently, industry exploration expenditures have shown a significant shift to in-situ- leaching projects. In 1990, 40 companies reported expenditures of US$17.1 million for exploration in the United States, of which US$2.5 million represented foreign participation in domestic exploration. Of the total exploration expenditures, surface drilling accounted for US$9.2 million (54 per cent), other exploration costs accounted for US$7.6 million (44 per cent), and new land acquisitions accounted for US$0.4 million (2 per cent). The increased level of total exploration expenditures in 1990, about 16 per cent above like expenditures in 1989, is attributed chiefly to increased expenditures for surface drilling and "other exploration" activities. There were no industry or government exploration expenditures abroad in 1989 and 1990; and no government exploration expenditures abroad expected in 1991.

Total surface drilling in the United States was 512 kilometers, including exploration and development drilling. Most of the surface drilling in 1990 was conducted in Wyoming, Texas, and Arizona. Drilling for solution mining (in-situ-leaching) production is not included in this totals.

Uranium activities reported as planned for 1991 include 427 kilometers of surface drilling. Total exploration expenditures planned for 1991 were about US$9.5 million, about 80 percent less than actual total expenditures for exploration in 1990.

In the United States in 1990, the total land held for exploration decreased to 4 860 square kilometers, the smallest annual amount of land held since 1973.

URANIUM EXPLORATION DOMESTIC EXPENDITURES

A - Industry Expenditures

YEAR InUSS 1988 20 100 000

1989 14 800 000

1990 17 100 000

1991* 9 500 000

Expected.

206 United States

B - Government Expenditures

YEAR InUSS 1988 2000 000 1989 2 100 000 1990 2 100 000 1991* 1 900 000

Expected.

URANIUM RESOURCES

Known Conventional Resources (RAR)

The estimate of RAR at $80/kg U for the end of 1990 was 101 900 tonnes U, a decrease of 9 400 tonnes U from the estimate of 111 300 tonnes U listed in the 1989 Red Book. The $80 to $130/kg U estimate of 254 200 tonnes U represents a decrease of 21 500 tonnes U. The $260/kg U RAR estimate decreased from 600 200 tonnes U to 581 000 tonnes U. These RAR totals for 1990 are estimated by the Energy Information Administration by using historical data and the data reported by companies.

Undiscovered Conventional Resources (EAR & SR)

EAR and SR estimates for 1989 recently were revised by the Energy Information Administration (EIA). This resulted in higher estimated values for 1989 EAR and SR due to enhancements made in the Uranium Resources Assessment Data (URAD) cost model that permits evaluation of deposits with higher average grades, such as those that are often associated with deposits in the breccia-pipe environment in the Colorado Plateau area of northern Arizona and adjacent Utah. The 1990 estimates of EAR for the $80, $130, and $260/kg U forward-cost categories show apparent increases of about 67, 44, and 46 per cent when compared, respectively, with the 1989 EAR values in the OECD/NEA 1989 Statistical Update. Estimates of 1990 SR also show apparent increases of about 15 and 10 per cent when compared, respectively, to the 1989 SR estimates for the $130 and $260/kg U forward-cost categories in that publication.

If, however, the 1990 EAR and SR estimates are compared with the revised 1989 EAR and SR estimates as published in the Uranium Industry Annual 1990, the 1990 EAR estimates arc less than 2 per cent lower than the revised 1989 EAR estimates. Similarly, the 1990 SR estimates for the $130 and $260/kg U forward-cost levels arc also less than 2 per cent lower, respectively, than the comparable revised 1989 SR estimates.

The revised estimates of 1989 and 1990 EAR and SR were derived using the estimates of uranium endowment prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the EIA under a Memorandum of

207 United States

Understanding between the two agencies. The 1989 and 1990 estimates of uranium endowment include new information based on USGS geological field studies in the Colorado Plateau area known to be favourable for deposits in breccia pipes. Subsurface geological data and mining data provided by industry firms active in this area were used by the USGS in preparing these uranium endowment estimates.

URANIUM RESOURCES - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES* (RAR) (EAR)

Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to $80/kg U between $80-130/kg U to S80/kg U between S80-130/kg U

101900 254 200 861 300 438 300

The U.S. Energy Information Administration does not separate EAR as EAR-I and EAR-II.

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES*

Recoverable at costs up to Sl30/kg U Cost Range Unassigned

861 300 480 600

As recoverable resources.

UNCONVENTIONAL OR BY-PRODUCT RESOURCES AS OF 1-1-90 (Tonnes U recoverable)

Deposit Name Location Deposit Type Tonnes U Grade Production Centre

Florida Central Uraniferous 14 000 0.010% Phosphoric acid Phosphate Florida phosphate plants in southern United States

URANIUM PRODUCTION

Status of Production Capability

Conventional milling facilities at the end of 1990 consisted of 14 mills active and inactive with a total capacity of 27 800 tonnes per day. At the end of 1990, two mills were operating, one in Texas and one in Utah. Additionally, during 1990 there were 15 non conventional facilities in the United States, of which two in-situ leach and three phosphate by-product plants were operating at the end of 1990. Eight in-situ leach plants and two by-product plants were idle at the end of 1990.

208 DISTRIBUTION OF URANIUM DEPOSITS AND MAJOR MINING DISTRICTS IN THE UNITED STATES

(p Major uranium mining districts <5 • Deposits totalling 1 - \ ,000 tonnes ot contained urantum *. Deposits totallingmor e than 1,000 tonnes of contained uranium a Area underlain by highly uraniterous phosphate I .*-#* BOKAN MTN United States

URANIUM MILLS AND PLANTS OPERATING AS OF DECEMBER 31,1990

Conventional Mills Location Nominal Capacity Start UD (tonnes per day)

Chevron Resources Hobson, Texas 2 300 1979 Pathfinder Mines Shirley Basin, WY. 1 600 1971

TOTAL (Mills Operating 12/31/90) 3 900

In Situ Leach Plants

Power Resources, Inc. Highland, Wyoming 1988 Uranium Resources, Inc. Rosita, Texas 1990

Phosphoric Acid and Copper Bv-Product

Freeport-McMoran Uncle Sam, Louisiana 1978 IMC Corp. New Wales, Florida 1978 IMC Corp. Plant City, Florida 1978

URANIUM MILLS NOT OPERATING AS OF DECEMBER 31,1990

Nominal Capacity Start Up (tonnes per day)

Cotter Corp. Canon City, Colo. 1 100 1958 Dawn Mining Co. Ford, Washington 400 1957 Homestake Mining Grants, N.M. 3 100 1958 Minerals Exploration Red Desert, Wyo. 2 700 1980 Pathfinder Mines Gas Hills, Wyo. 2 500 1958 Plateau Resources Ticaboo, Utah 900 1982 Rio Algom Mining Grants, N.M. 6 400 1958 Rio Algom Mining La Sal, Utah 700 1972 UMETCO Natrona, Wyo. 1 200 1958 UMETCO Uravan, Colo. 1 300 1948 UMETCO/EFN Blanding, Utah 1 800 1980 Western Nuclear Wellpinit, Wash. 1 800 1978

TOTAL (Mills Not Operating 12/31/90) 23 900

210 United States

HISTORICAL URANIUM PRODUCTION (tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total thru Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 Conventional Mining 300 500 2 700 3 140 1 790 308 130 1 700 In-Situ Leaching W W W W W W By-Product W w W w W W Production Unconventional 19 700 2 340 2 180 I 630 25 850 1 800 Mining*

W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. * = Unconventional mining includes production from in-situ leaching and by-product recovery operations. Note = Data on projected concentrate production are not available.

Ownership Structure of the Uranium Industry

The United States 1990 total uranium production can be attributed by ownership as follows:

68.3 per cent private domestic

28.5 per cent private foreign

3.2 per cent government foreign

U.S. mining companies accounted for the largest share of private-domestic ownership of the 1990 total U.S. uranium production, while foreign mining companies accounted for the largest share of private-foreign ownership of U.S. production.

OWNERSHIP OF URANIUM PRODUCTION

DOMESTIC FOREIGN TOTALS Government Private Government Private [iU| [%1 [tUl ItUl [tUI [lUI [%1 2 340 68.3 110 3.2 970 28.5 3 420 100.0

211 United States

Employment in the Uranium Industry

Employment in the U.S. uranium industry was 1 340 person-years during 1990, a decline of 16 per cent from the employment level for 1989. The largest annual employment recorded for the U.S. uranium industry was 21 950 person-years in 1979.

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years) ri—~ i Total to Expected 1984* 1985* 1986* 1987* 1988* 1989* 1990* 1990* 1991

3 600 2 450 2 120 2000 2 140 1 580 1 340 15 230 NA

* = Employment data shown for 1984 through 1990 are for U.S. uranium exploration, mining, and milling activiiies. NA = Data on projected employment are not available.

Future Production Centres

As of the end of 1990, there was one committed new production center in the United States. Ferret Exploration Company of Nebraska will start up its Crow Butte in situ leach property in 1991. The full annual production is expected to reach around 380 tonnes of U by 1993.

Short-Term Production Capability

Actual production capability for EXISTING and COMMITTED centres based on uranium resources recoverable at costs of US$80/kg U or less is expected to more than double from the 1990 level of 3 400 lonncs U/ycar lo 7 300 lonncs U/ycar in the mid-1990s; and to subsequently fall off to about 2 400 lonnes by the year 2010. Uranium production for EXISTING and COMMITTED centres based on uranium resources recoverable at costs of US$130/kg U or less arc similiarly expected to rise to approximately 11 400 tonnes U/year by 1995 and fall off thereafter to 3 900 tonnes U/year by 2010. Short term production capability for EXISTING, COMMITTED, PLANNED and PROSPECTIVE centres is expected to peak in about 1995 at 11 400 tonnes U/ycar and 18 400 tonnes U/ycar for the low cost and higher cost resources respectively (sre- fable 12 for further information).

The United Stales further reports that approximately 23.6 per ceni of its RAR resources reported above arc recoverable at $80/kg U or less arc tributary to EXISTING and COMMITTED production ccnircs. Approximately 11.3 per cent of the RAR reported above as recoverable at $13()/kg U arc tributary to EXISTING and COMMITTED production centres.

212 United States

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

The nuclear power programme in the United States remains the largest in the world with over 26 per cent of the world's operating reactors and more than 30 per cent of the world's net electrical generation in 1990. As of January 1st, 1991, the United Stales had 111 operable nuclear reactors with a total net operable electrical capacity of 99 600 MWe. Three new units entered into commercial operation in 1990. In February, 1991, the U.S. Department of Energy released the National Energy Strategy. This strategy presents a framework within which various energy policies, including the nuclear option, can contribute to meeting the energy needs of the United States. Further, active steps are being taken to extend operating lifetimes of nuclear plants as well as stimulate orders for new nuclear plants.

Uranium requirements are projected to be slightly higher than last year's projections. The enrichment tails assays requested by utilities arc expected to remain at 0.30 per cent through 2000 instead of declining to 0.26 per cent by that year. The U.S. nuclear power plant capacity factors have increased significantly from 57 percent in 1987 to 64 percent in 1988, 62 percent in 1989, and 66 percent in 1990. This increased capacity factor also results in higher uranium requirements.

Supply and Procurement Strategy

Each electric utility in the United States has its own uranium supply and procurement strategy. There is no single, uniform strategy that applies to all U.S. electric utility firms.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY (NET SUMMER CAPABILITY) TO 2010 (MWe*)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2(XX) 2005 2010 100 100 101 102 102 103 105 107 KM

CNP91 Lower Reference Case.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS TO 2010 (Tonnes U*)

1990 1991 1992 199.3 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

11 4(X) 16 000 16 (XX) 16 (XX) 16 000 16 (XX) 16 2(X) 15 300 16 400

* WNFCR91 Lower Reference Case.

213 United States

POLICIES

National Policies Relating to Uranium

The U.S. Government provides uranium-enrichment services for foreign and domestic customers. In the United States, uranium exploration, production, and marketing activities are conducted solely by private-sector companies, and there are no Federal restrictions on these activities whether conducted by domestic- or foreign-owned companies. Several foreign companies currently have financial and ownership interests in a number of uranium properties and facilities in the United Stales.

Policy on Activities in Foreign Countries

The U.S. Government does not carry out any uranium activities in foreign countries. There are no U.S. policies restricting domestic, privately-owned companies from exploring or producing uranium in foreign countries.

Uranium Export Policy

A specific Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license is required for the exportation of natural uranium. A specific license also is required before enriched uranium can be exported from the United States. Criteria applied to licensing include: that the export not be inimical to the U.S. common defense and security and that the export (when intended for eventual nuclear use) be pursuant to the terms and conditions of an agreement for co-operation. Such terms and conditions include: guarantees that safeguards be applied; that there will be no use for nuclear explosives or for research on any nuclear explosive device; and that adequate physical security will be maintained. Except as specifically provided in an agreement for co-operation, no uranium exported from the United States, without prior U.S. approval, may be: (1) altered in form or content by enrichment or reprocessing, or (2) rctransfcrred from one agreement for co-operation to another agreement for co-operation.

Uranium Import Policy

In late 1986, the U.S. Congress passed the "Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986" which forbade the import into the United States as of January 1, 1987, of uranium ore or uranium oxide (U,Os) of South African origin for use in domestic nuclear power reactors. On March 10, 1987, the U.S. Department of the Treasury issued a final rule providing that uranium ore or uranium oxide substantially transformed outside the United States into natural or enriched uranium hcxafluoridc (UF6) is not covered by the Act's sanctions, and can be brought into the United States for domestic consumption. On July 11, 1991, President Bush lifted most of the trade and investment sanctions in the Anti-Apartheid Act. With the lifting of the trade sanctions against South Africa, there arc currently no U.S. government limitations on importation of uranium from any foreign country.

Uranium Stockpile Policy

The United States has no specific policy regarding the maintenance of national strategic stockpiles of uranium. The existing stockpile will be used to meet needs for loll enrichment operations of the Government's uranium enrichment plants, other Government uses, and as an emergency source of supply for the industry.

214 United States

STOCKS

Significant Changes to Uranium Stocks

Total commercial stocks of uranium (equivalent U) at the end of 1990 were about 2 270 tonnes U less than like stocks as of the end of 1989. Stocks of uranium (equivalent U) held by utilities as of the end of 1990 were about 5 300 tonnes U less than utilities' stocks held at the end of 1989. Supplier's stocks of uranium (equivalent U) at the end of 1990 were 3 080 tonnes greater than like stocks held at the end of 1989. During 1990, the Government's inventory of natural uranium decreased by 6 800 tonnes U and its inventory of enriched uranium increased by 3 100 tonnes U.

Not all U.S. utilities report having a policy regarding maintaining certain inventory levels for forward coverage of requirements. At the end of 1990, U.S. utilities held stocks of about 39 200 tonnes U as natural and enriched uranium. This amount was just below the sum of utility enrichment feed deliveries reported for 1991, or about 1 year's requirements.

TOTAL URANIUM STOCKS AS OF THE END OF 1990 (Tonnes Natural U-cquivalent)

Natural uranium Enriched Depicted Reprocessed Holder slocks in uranium stocks uranium stocks uranium stocks concentrates

Government 23 000 12600 NA NA

Producer 9 900 1 700 NA NA

Utility 23 600 15 600 NA NA _ .... TOTAL 29 900 NA NA 56 5(H) NA = Not applicable.

PRICES

Uranium Pricing

In the U.S. uranium market, the quantity-weighted average delivered price for the 7 190 tonnes U delivered in 1990 to utilities from domestic suppliers for which prices were reported was $40.82 per kg U. The comparable price in 1989 was $50.86 per kg U for 4 850 tonnes U. The decrease in the 1990 average-delivered price continued the downward trend in the annual average-delivered price for uranium during the c !y 1980's.

The quantity-weighted average delivered price reported by U.S. buyers for imported uranium in 1990 was $32.63 per kg U (9 040 tonnes U), down from the $43.55 per kg U paid for actual deliveries in 1989 (5 040 tonnes U). The total quantity of uranium imported in 1990 was 9 120 tonnes U, of which approximately 4 500 tonnes U (49 per cent) were imported by utilities and 4 620 tonnes U (51 percent) were imported by suppliers.

215 • USSR •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Historical Review

The uranium exploration activities in the USSR can be divided into the five distinct periods 1914 - 1940, 1940 - 1950, 1950 - 1960, 1960 - 1970, and 1970 to recent.

Between 1914 - 1940, the Tyuya-Muyun deposit in Fergana, discovered already in 1900 was investigated, and the deposits Taboshar (1925), Adrasman (1934) and Maylisu (1940) were discovered. These discoveries led to the recognition of the first uranium district in the USSR, Karama/ar (see map).

In the period 1940 - 1950, exploration was limited to the later part of this decade, during which the districts of Krivorozh(Pcrvomaiskoyc, Zhcltovodskoye) and Stavropol (Beshtau and Bykogorskoyc) were discovered. Also additional deposits (Kattasay, Chauli, Maylisay) were found in the Karama/ar district.

During the decade 1950 - 1960 the application of new exploration methods, among them airborne radiometrics, led to the discoveries of the districts Zacaspiysk with the deposits Mclovoyc, Tomakskoye, Taybagarskoye and Tasmurun, Pribalkhash with the deposits of Kurday, Botaburum, Kyzylsay, and D/hideli, Kyzylkum with the Utch-Kuduk deposit and Kokchctavsk with the deposits Manybay, Ishimskoye, Zaozcmoyc. These discoveries were the base of the large uranium mining industry in the USSR.

In the period 1960 - 1970, the scientific research work on conceptual deposit models and the use of airborne radiometrics led to the discovery of a new deposit type, the vein - stockworks in continental volcanic complexes. The prominent example is the Streltsovsk deposit. In the same lime, another important uranium dcposii type, the metasomatic albitite deposits were discovered in close proximity to the Krivoro/h uranium district in what became the Kirovograd district with the deposits Michurinskoyc, Vatutinsk- ye and Severinskoye. The practical experiences gained in ISL techniques led to increased efforts to explore for sandstone type deposits. Subsequently, discoveries were made in the Kyzylkum district, which became the most important uranium district in the USSR.

During 1970 - 1980, additional sandstone type uranium deposits were found in the Zauralsk and Vitimsk regions. Also discoveries were made in black shales in the Kyzylkum and Onczhsk districts.

216 USSR

URANIUM RESOURCES

The uranium resources of the USSR are located in nine districts with developed uranium deposits, referred to as "uranium ore areas" and five districts with known but undeveloped uranium resources, referred to as "uranium bearing areas". Both groups will be briefly reviewed as follows.

Uranium-ore areas: they include the districts Kirovograd, Krivorozh, Stavropol, Zacaspiysk, Kyzylkum, Karamazar, Pribalkhash, Kokchetavsk and Streltsovsk (see map).

- Kirovograd: location between the southern portion of the Bug river and the Ingula river and east of Zheltjc Vody; the uranium mineralisation belongs mainly to the albitite type and is associated with a Proterozoic granite gneiss dome; a smaller portion of the uranium is related to a potassic metasomatism; the albitite uranium deposits include Michurinskoye, Scverinskoye, and Vatutinskoyc; the other deposits related to the potassic metasomatism include smaller ones such as Yuzhnoye, Kalinovskoye, and Lozovatskoye; the total known resources amount to about 82 000 tonnes U and the undiscovered resources 250 000 tonnes U; the largest deposit in this district is Severinskoyc.

- Krivorozh: location at the Dnieper river close to the town of Zheltie Vody; the deposits Pervomaiskoye and Zheltovodskoye are located in Proterozoic schists and iron quartzites and the mineralisation is controlled by faults and associated alkali metasomatism; in addition uranium mineralisation occurs in surficial deposits of Quarternary age (Dcvladovo, Bratskoye), which were mined by ISL methods; total resources of this district were 35 900 tonnes U, most of which arc currently mined out.

- Stavropol: location in the northern foothills of the Caucasus, in the upper drainage basin of the Kuma river; the defiosits making up this district are Beshtau and Bykogorskoye, belonging to the vein-stockwork type associated with acid to intermediate porphyritic intrusives; the total resource in the two deposits amounted to 5 300 tonnes U, which are mined out.

- Zacaspiysk: location at the eastern shore of the Caspian Sea on the Mangyshlak peninsula; the uranium mineralisation is hosted in Neogenc-Quarternary pyrite bearing clays containing fish bone detritus; the deposits are Meiovoye, Tomakskoye, Tasmurun, and Taybagar, whose resources total 64 400 tonnes U of which 43 800 tonnes U are contained in Melovoyc.

- Kyzylkum: location between the Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers in the northwestern foothills of the Tien Shan-Pamir mountain ranges; again two types of uranium deposits occur in this district; the more significant type include sandstone deposits associated with oxidation-reduction interfaces in numerous stratigraphic horizons of Cretaceous age; in addition, mineralisation is hosted in black schists of Silurian-Ordovician age; the deposits belonging to these types are the sandstone uranium deposits Uchkuduk, Sugraly, Ljavljakan, Beshkak, Bukinay and Kanimeh, and the black schists deposits Rudnoye, Koscheka, and Dzhantuar; the total known resources of this district amount to 165 300 tonnes U as well as about 275 000 tonnes U undiscovered resources; of this known resource base about 155 000 tonnes U arc in sandstone deposits, the largest being Uchkuduk and Sugraly.

217 s

8 |-^3| 9 |oil|lo[~T~]l

EXPLANATION 1 to 8: Geological structures: 1: ancient platform complexes; 2: ancient platform cover complexes 3 to 7: Geosynclina! folded complexes of various stabilizations: 3: Baikal; 4: Caledonian; 5. Hercynian; 6: Mesozojc; 7: Cenozoic 8: Young platform cover complexes on pre-Mesozoic folded basement 9: "Uranium - ore areas": 1: Kirovograd; 2: Krivorozh; 3: Stavropol; 4: Zacapiysk; 5: Kyzylkum, 6: Karamazar; 7: Pribalkhash; 8: Kokchetavsk, 9: Streltsovsk 10: "Uranium - bearing areas": 10: Zauralsk; 11: Yeniseisk; 12: Vitimsk, 13: Central-Transbaikal; 14: Onezhsk; 15: Far East LOCATION OF USSR URANIUM RESOURCES 11: Single deposit: Ustochka USSR

- Karamazar: location in the NW part of the Tien Shan mountains; the uranium deposits of this district belong to the vein-stockwork volcanic type of Permian age, and to the stratiform deposits in calcareous Paleogene sediments; the first type includes the deposits Alatanga, Chauli, Maylikatan, Taboshar and Adrasman, while the deposits Maylisu, Shaptar and Maylisay are hosted in the calcareous sediments, which due to the presence of oil and gas offer a reducing environment; the total known resources of this district amounted to 20 000 tonnes U, of which Alatanga and Chauli were the largest deposits each with resources of 4 500 tonnes U; the resources of the Karamazar district are practically depicted.

- Pribalkhash: location in the northwestern foothills of the Tien Shan range and extending to the western shore of the Balkash Lake; the uranium mineralisation is associated with late Silurian- Devonian acid to basic volcanics and occurs as vein-stockworks in liparitic volcanics; the deposits of this district include Botaburum, Kyzylsay, Kurday and Dzhideli; the resources of this district total 121 900 tonnes U mostly belonging to the low cost category; the largest deposit is Botaburum with 10 000 tonnes U.

- Kokchetavsk: location between the cities of Kokchctav and Stcpnogorsk; two types of uranium mineralisation are known in this district: vein-stockworks associated with Silurian-Devonian granitoids intruding Prccambrian gneisses and Cambrian volcano-sedimentary rocks, as well as stratiform sandstone deposits in pre-uppcr Jurassic sediments; the vein-stockwork deposits include Ishimskoyc, Vostok, Balkashinskoye, Grachevskoye, Zaozemoye, Tastykolskoyc, and Manybay, as well as the Scmizbay sandstone deposit; the entire district contained 208 800 tonnes U known resources; depleted arc the deposits Ishimskoyc, Balkashinskoye, and Manybay, while the deposits Vostok, Grachevskoye and Zao/.ernoye arc being mined.

- Strellsovsk: location: eastern Transbaikal area, at the Argun river; the vein-stockwork type mineralisation occurs in an upper Jurassic caidera filled with acid to intermediate volcanics and volcanogenic sediments and shows also stratiforms in favorable horizons; the deposits in this district include Streltsovskoyc, Tulukucvskoye, Yubilijnoye, Novogodnce, and Dalncc, whose known resources amount to 124 000 tonnes U. In addition there are undiscovered resources, estimated at 157 000 tonnes U.

Uranium-bearing areas; these include the districts Zaural.sk, Yeniseisk, Vitimsk, the Central Transbaikalian region, Onezhsk as well as the Far Eastern region (sec map).

- Zauralsk: location about 80 km cast of Chcljabinsk, between the rivers Pyshma and Ui; two uranium deposit types occur in the sedimentary cover of the basement exhibiting Hcrcynian age folding; the uranium occurs in upper Jurassic sediments in the stratiform sandstone type deposits Dolmalovskoye and Dobrovolskoyc, as well as in recent valley fills as surficial deposits (Sanarskoyc deposit); the source for the deposits in upper Jurassic sediments arc Paleozoic acid volcanics; the surficial type deposit is associated with sandy carbonaceous; the uranium in the surficial deposit Sanarskoyc is mined out; the known uranium resources in the Zauralsk district arc estimated at about 16 (XX) tonnes U most of which arc in the higher cost category associated with the Domlmatovskoyc and Dobrovolskoye deposits.

219 USSR

- Yeniseisk: location in the surroundings of the city Abakan; uranium occurs as vein type deposits and sandstone type deposits associated with a Precambrian uplift consisting of a granitic and metamorphic complex as well as with Devonian-Carboniferous sediments; the deposits in this district are Labyshskoye (vein type), as well as Primorkskoye and Ust-Uyuk (sandstone type); the latter ones are the larger deposits; the uranium resources of this district include 7 600 tonnes U known resources, as well as 35 600 tonnes U in the undiscovered categories.

- Vitimsk: location: in the northern part of the Transbaikalian region, occupying a portion of the plateau between the Vitim and Amalat rivers; the uranium deposits in this area are located in Quartemary valley fills beneath basaltic covers of varying thickness; the valley are incised into the Proterozoic granitic-metamorphic basement; most of the resources are located in sediments below the permafrost, which makes their recovery difficult; known resources in this area are estimated at 24 000 tonnes U; in addition undiscovered resources are believed to amount to 43 000 tonnes U.

- The Central Transbaikalian district: location: in the surroundings of the city of Chita; the uranium resources of this district are associated with three deposit types: the vein-stockwork type ("Streltsovskoye type") related to upper Jurassic-lower Cretaceous volcanic structures, vein type in Mesozoic granites as well as the sandstone type in lower Cretaceous carbonaceous sediments preserved in a graben structure; the deposits belonging to these types include Olovskoye (vein-siockwork), Gornoyc and Bere/ovoye (vein types) as well as Stepnoyc (sandstone type); the resources in this district include 21 000 tonnes U known resources, as well as 13 000 tonnes U undiscovered resources; the largest deposit in this district is Olovskoyc.

- Onezhsk: location: in the morphological depression occupied in its southern portion by the Onega Lake; the uranium mineralisation is located in Karelian age Proterozoic sediments (conglomerates, schists, dolomites) filling a trough on Archcan-Protero/oic granite-gneiss basement; the uranium associated with among others with gold and platinum group elements occurs in faults with some lateral extensions in favorable host rocks; the deposit in this area is Padma, with 2 000 tonnes U known resources and 3 000 tonnes U undiscovered resources; the district: a full assessment of the resources in the Onczhsk district is not yet available.

- Far Eastern district: it covers the Assuri and Amur basins, the eastern part of the Lena basin, the Okhot Sea coast, the basins of the Kolyma and Chukolka peninsula; the area is largely still unexplored for uranium; known is one deposit, Lastochka, a vcin-stockwork type, associated with a volcano-structural depression filled with lower Cretaceous rocks covering a Paleozoic granitic basement; the known resources in the Lastochka deposit arc estimated at 3 900 tonnes U; in addition undiscovered resources arc believed to amount to 300 000 tonnes U.

Based on the above listed resources in the different districts the following summary for the resource categories has be. compiled.

220 USSR

KNOWN URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1991

(Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES + ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Category I** (RAR + EAR-I)

District Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Total recoverable at up to USS80/kg U between costs below USS80-130/kg U USS130/kg U

Kirovograd 44 000 38 400 82 400 Krivorozh*** 28 200 2600 30 800 Stavropol*** 3 300 3 300 Zacaspiysk 64 400 64 400 Kyzylkum 155 600 9 700 165 300 Karamazar*** 20 000 20 000 Pribalkhash 17 900 4000 21 900 Kokchetavsk*** 72 400 26 800 99 200 Streltsovsk*** 119 200 4 800 124 000 Zauralsk 4 400 12 000 16 400 Yeniseisk 7600 7600 Viiimsk 23 700 23 700 Central Transbaikal 20 700 20 700 Onezhsk 2 000 2000 Far East 3 900 3 900

TOTAL 465 000 220 600 685 600

As in situ resources.

Corresponds to the original resource categories B + C,+ C2 recoverable at costs of up to USS80/kg U and between US580-120/kg U.

District where uranium resources have been partly or wholly exhausted.

221 USSR

UNDISCOVERED URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1991 (Tonnes U)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category II** (EAR-II)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Total recoverable at District up to US$80/kg U between costs up to US$80-130/kg U USS 130/kg U

Kirovograd 71 500 111600 183 100 Krivorozh 2 200 2900 5 100 Stavropol 2000 - 2000 Kyzylkum 106 000 8 300 114 300 Pribaikhash 50 000 - 50 000 Kokchetavsk 9 200 30 400 39 600 Streltsovsk 84 800 2 200 87 000 Zauralsk 100 2 500 2600 Yeniseisk - 2 400 2 400 Vitimsk - 3 800 3 800 Central Transbaikal - 8 300 8 300 Onezhsk - 3000 3000 TOTAL 325 800 175 400 501 200

* As in situ resources. ** Corresponds to the original resource category P, recoverable at costs of up to USS80/kg U and between USS80-120/kg U.

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES*** (SR)

District Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Total to USS 130/kg U above USS 130/kg U Kirovograd 70 000 70 000 Kyzylkum 160 000 160 000 Pribaikhash 50 000 50 000 Kokchetavsk 70 000 70 000 Strcltsovsk 70 000 70 000 Zauralsk 15000 15 000 Yeniseisk 20 000 20 000 Vitimsk 40 000 40 000 Central Transbaikal 5000 5 000 Far East 300 000 300 000

TOTAL 500 000 300 000 800 000

Corresponds to the original resource category P2 recoverable at costs up to USS120/kg U and above USS120/kg U.

222 USSR

In addition to the lower cost resources listed above, some higher cost resources are reported. They are recoverable at costs of above US$130/kg U and belong to the Known Resources (Table 3) and EAR-II (Table 4) categories. These estimates amount to 7 200 tonnes U and 6 000 tonnes U, respectively. Thus, including these higer cost resources, the total of all resource categories reported for the USSR reach 2 000 000 tonnes U.

Based on this total, the following table provides a summary on their distribution by deposit types.

URANIUM RESOURCES BY DEPOSIT TYPES (1000 Tonnes U)

— ' ™ 1i DEPOSIT TYPE DISTRICT RESOURCES %

Vein/Stockwork - in volcanic complexes Streltsovsk Pribalkhash 340 17 Karamazar

- in folded regions Kokchetavsk 228 11

Metasomatic Stockwork Kirovograd 360 18 in albitites Krivorozh

Sandstone Type - Cenozoic roll-fronts Kyzylkum 525 26 - Older roll-fronts Zauralsk 30 2

Yeniseisk - Palcovallcy fills Vitimsk 110 5 Krivorozh Kirovograd

Fish-bone Detritus Zacaspiysk 65 3

Black Shales Kyzylkum 23 1 Onezhsk

Other Types 317 17

TOTAL 2000 100

223 USSR

URANIUM PRODUCTION

In 1991, the Ministry of Atomic Power and Industry operated the following uranium production centres (see Figures), whose specific production capabilities were not officially available.

- The Eastern ("Vostochny") Mining and Processing Complex in Zheltie Vody: in a number of mines of the Krivoi Rog and Kirovograd districts, which include Pcrmovaiskoye, Zheltovodskoye, Severeinskoye, and Vatutinskoye, albitite uranium ore is mined and processed in Zheltie Vody.

- The Prikaspiysky Mining and Chemical Complex in Shevchenko: the mine production comes from the Zacaspiysk district, which includes as largest the Melovoye mine, as well as Tomakskoye, Tasmurun and Taybagan by-products include phosphate, REE and scandium.

- The Navoinsky Mining and Metallurgy Complex in Navoi: the ores are produced from the sandstone type deposits in the Kyzylkum district, which includes the conventional mines Uch Kuduk and Sugraly, as well as the ISL operations Bukinay and Bcshkak. In addition to uranium, there is by-product recovery of selenium, molybdenum, scandium and precious metals.

- The Eastern ("Vostochny") Rare Metal Industrial Complex in the city of Khodzent, where the production of the Karamazar district is being processed.

- The Tselinny Mining and Chemical Complex in Stepnogorsk: this complex includes the production from the Kokchetavsk district, where the vein-stockwork deposits Grachevskoyc, Zaozemoyc and Vostok, as well the Semizbay sandstone deposit arc being mined. Byproduct recovery includes phosphates and molybdenum.

- The Yuzhipolimetal Production Association in Bishkek: this complex processes ores mined from the vein-stockwork deposits Botaburum, Kyzylsay, Kurday and Dzhideli and recovers molybdenum as byproduct.

- The Priargunsky Mining and Chemical Complex in Krasnokamensk works the mines Streltsovskoye and Tulukuevskoye in the Streitsovsk district; the byproduct recovery of molybdenum is reported.

- The Industrial Association "Almaz" in Lcrmontov which treats the ore produced in the Stavropol district.

- The Malysnevsk's Mining Utility located in the Sverdlovsks region.

224 USSR URANIUM IN THE USSR

Kazakhstan Kazakhstan 32% 29%

Russia Uzbekistan 51% 8% Uzbekistan kraine Ukraine 29% 12% 8% Production in 1990 Exploration Expenditures 1944 1990

Exploration Expenditures = 4.8 miliion rb

URANIUM DEPOSITS AND PRODUCTION CENTRES IN SOUTHERN USSR

Deposit*

Production centre*

225 USSR

The total 1991 production capability of the USSR was reported to be about 16 500 tonnes U/year. The actual production in 1991 was officially reported to be 13 500 tonnes U1. Domestic deliveries in 1991 were 7 500 tonnes U. Another 6 500 tonnes U were exported.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

As of 31 December 1990, the electrical power reactors connected to the grid amounted to 45 with a total nuclear generating capacity of 34 673 MW(e). This reactor park included 24 reactors with 18 359 MW(e)ofthePWRtype,20 reactors with 15 754 MW(e) of the Light-Water-Cooled, Graphite- Moderated Reactor (LWGR or RBMK) type, as well as one reactor of the FBR type. The installed nuclear generating capacity and the related uranium requirements through the year 2010 are projected as shown in the following tables.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY [MW(e)]

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

34 673 37 523 38 473* 39 423* 41 323* 44 150* 57 000* 60 000* 80 000*

* Secretariat estimate 1992-2010.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS* (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010

7000 7 500 NA NA NA 8 800 10 500 11 500 11 500

Secretariat estimate.

1. The Secretariat notes for informational purposes, that in discussions with Soviet officials, it was indicated that uranium production had fallen off in recent years. Actual production was indicated to have been in the range of: 14 000 tonnes U in 1990; 14 500 tonnes U in 1989; and as high as 15 000 to 16 000 tonnes U previously. The capacities of the USSR production centres were indicated to range from about 400 tonnes U/year to 4 000 tonnes U/year. Some 22 000 to 24 000 people were estimated to be involved in uranium mining and milling.

226 • Viet Nam •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Historical Review

The history of the geological exploration for uranium and combined with that, for rare earth elements reflects the political development and its social and economical consequences in the country. Accordingly, the following three periods for uranium exploration can be distinguished:

- Prior to 1955: exploration was done by the then Geological Department of Indochina with French geologists responsible for the activities; during this period the most important achievement was the discovery of the autunite veins in the Piaoac granite.

- From 1955 - 1978: the main objective in this period was uranium exploration combined with geological mapping in the area north of longitude 17° North; in the first part of this time period, uranium exploration was under the responsiblility of the Geological Survey, reporting to the Ministry of Industry and Trade; later, under the General Department of Geology; this organisation was responsible for the following discoveries (see map):

• the Binh duong uranium deposit in Pleistocene proluvial sediments; • the Nam xe uraniferous REE occurrence; • the Muong hum uraniferous REE deposit; • the Sinh quyen copper-uranium occurrence.

- Between 1978 and recent: the main activities during this period included geological research and uranium exploration covering the entire territory of Viet Nam; the General Department of Mining and Geology, which was responsible for uranium exploration, was replaced in the latter part of this period by the Geological Survey, which reports to the Ministry of Heavy Industries; during this time, the following uranium deposits and occurrences were discovered (see map):

• the Tien an graphite - uranium occurrence; • the Nong son and Nui hong uranium bearing coal deposits, and • the Nong son sandstone uranium deposit.

Recent and Ongoing Activities

In 1989 and 1990, the exploration activities included:

- a research project on the general characteristics of the distribution of uranium mineralisation in Vict Nam;

- an airborne survey at 1 : 25 000 scale in the central part of the country;

227 Viet Nam

- regional exploration at 1 : 25 000 scale in the Ha-Giand Province; as well as

- detailed exploration at 1 : 10 000 scale for sandstone-type uranium deposits in the Quang nam - Da nang Province.

URANIUM RESOURCES

The uranium resources discovered in Viet Nam have distinct characteristics as regards their distribution in time and space.

1. The known resources discovered up to the end of 1990, are distributed over the entire country in various topographical environments. However, most of the resources are concentrated in the northern and central pans of the country.

2. The age of the known resources r?nges from Proterozoic to Quartemary. However, it appears that the most favorable age for the formation of uranium deposits is the Mesozoic.

3. The grade of the mineralisation varies from 0.05 per cent to 1.0 per cent U.

4. The main uranium deposits and occurrences discovered so far, belong to the following deposit types:

- sandstone deposits; - vein deposits; - volcanic deposits; - metamorphic deposits; - coal deposits; and - surficial deposits.

Examples of these deposit types are described as follows:

Sandstone deposits: This type includes the Nong son deposit, which is located in the synonymous sandstone basin in Central Viet Nam. This basin is considered a rift, which was formed in late Paleozoic-early Mesozoic times. The boundaries of the basin consist of Paleozoic granites with a uranium content of 12 - 15 ppm U. The basement of the basin consists of Proterozoic metamorphics in the south and lower Paleozoic sediments in the north. The basin filling includes mainly Triassic continental sediments consisting from the bottom to the top of conglomerates, grey to red sandstones with organic matter and limestone, grey to red sandstone-mudstone sequence overlain by coal bearing sediments, which also are uranifcrous (see below). The uranium mineralisation includes pitchblende, uranium bearing arsenates and vanadates, as well as autunite and camotitc.

Vein deposits: Examples are the Nam xc uranium bearing REE occurrence and the copper-uranium occurrence Sinn quyen.

228 Viet Nam

The Nam xe REE occurrence is located in Paleozoic marble forming the centre of an anticline. The marble overlies metan.orphic and volcanic rocks. The mineralisation is both in massive veins with 8 - 10 per cent REO and in impregnations with 1 - 2 per cent REO. Due to the tropical weathering, the RE content is enriched in weathered material, which resembles dark brown soil with 4 - 5 per cent REO. The main uranium bearing mineral is pyrochlore associated with bastnaesitc and parisite. The uranium grade in pyrochlore ranges from 1 to several per cent U.

The Sinh quyen copper-uranium vein type occurrence is hosted in metasomaiic rocks within Proterozoic metamorphics. The ore bodies are concentrated in a quartzitic zone, the ore minerals being chalcopyrite, pyrite and uraninite.

Volcanic deposits: The Tule uranium occurrence is classified as volcanic type. The uranium bearing rocks are sediments derived from acid to alkalic volcanics. The main members of the sequence arc a subvolcanic granite porphyry, rhyolites, trachyte-liparite porphyries, a tuffaceous sandstone-mudstone sequence, a tuffaceous shale with organic materia] as well as a conglomerate with volcanic components. The main ore minerals are uraninite, uranophan, uranium molybdate as well as molybdenite.

Metamorphic deposit: An example is the Tien an occurrence, where uranium is associated with irregular graphite bodies located at the flancs of an anticline.

Some coal deposits including anthracite, are uranium bearing, however, the grades are very low. The uraniferous coal in the upper Triassic portion of the Nong son basin is one example.

Surficial deposits: The Binh duong uranium deposit, belonging to this deposit type, occurs in Neogene-early Quartemary sediments covering the contact between a Cretaceous two mica-granite and Devonian limestones. The ore minerals autunite and torbemite arc in small nests and lenses.

According to preliminary calculations the break down of the known uranium resources of Viet Nam, by deposit type is:

• sandstone deposit: 45 per cent • vein deposit: 40 per cent • volcanic deposit: 10 per cent • others: 5 per cent

KNOWN URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category I (EAR-I)**

Recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U Recoverable at costs between S80-130/kg U

- 200

* No information on recovcrability available. ** Equivalent to the resource categories CI + C2.

229 Viet Nam

PRINCIPAL URANIUM DEPOSITS AND OCCURRENCES IN VIET NAM

.••'"V /Binh Buonj"*" ~>

<- 1 Iinh Q«

f

^ •-,.•>' •> HANOI /^ Legend : IS Uranium depoiiti c k Uranium ouurrenlts

o

°c «

<_/ '

230 Viet Nam

UNDISCOVERED RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category II (E\R-II)**

Recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U Recoverable at costs between $80-130/kg U - 200

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES***

Recoverable at costs up to $80/kg U Recoverable at costs above S130/kg U

100 000 80 000

* No information on recoverability available. ** Equivalent to the resource categories C2 + PI. *** Equivalent to the resource category P.

It is planned to utilise the experiences in Viet Nam and other countries and to pay increased attention to uranium resources nni yet discovered in Viet Nam, but which could be expected in accordance with the geological environments of the country. These deposit types include the quartz- pebble conglomerate and unconformity-related deposits.

NATIONAL POLICIES RELATING TO URANIUM

The co-operation with foreign companies in uranium exploration is encouraged based on the principles of equality and mutual benefits, as provided for in the Foreign Investment Law of Viet Nam.

231 • Yugoslavia •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The surface drilling programme initiated in 1989 in the surroundings of the Zirovski Vrh uranium mine in the Republic of Slovenia was completed in early 1990. Since then, no further exploration in this area was done.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In Dinar InUSS 1988 896 000 70 000 1989 2 945 000 215 000 1990 42 000 3600 1991 - -

URANIUM RESOURCES

In 1990, a re-assessment of the uranium resources of the Zirovski Vrh deposit was carried out.

The ore deposit is located in folded grey sandstones of the Permian Grocdcn formation, where the ore occurs in elongated lenses grouped together in belts. The in situ RAR recoverable at costs of between $80-130/kg U amount to 1.35 million tonnes ore grading about 0.12 per cent U and the EAR-I of the same cost category total 8.64 million tonnes ore at about 0.11 per cent U. In addition, EAR-II were estimated to total 1.16 million tonnes ore at about 0.1 per cent U. The quantities of uranium recoverable from these ores are listed in the following tables.

232 Yugoslavia

URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (RAR) Category I (EAR-I)

Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs up Recoverable at costs to $80/kg U between S80-130/kg U to S80/kg U between 580-130/kg U

- 900 - 5000

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES - Category II* (EAR-II)

Recoverable at costs up to S80/kg U Recoverable at costs between $80-130/kg U 580

Refer to recoverable resources in the Zirovski Vrh deposit.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

The Zirovski Vrh mine is the only uranium producer in Yugoslavia. Mining commenced in 1982 and the mill started operation in 1984. The present production capability is 102 tonnes U/year.

The mine is developed as an underground mine with access through an haulage tunnel. The ore occurring in numerous lenses in a coarse grained sandstone is mined selectively using room and pillar and cut and fill methods.

Current plans are to close the mine in 1991 and to procede with its decommissioning.

URANIUM PRODUCTION (Tonnes U contained in concentrate)

Total to Expected Production Method Pre-1988 1988 1989 1990 1990 1991 Conventional Mining 161 80 86 53 380 5

233 Yugoslavia

EMPLOYMENT IN EXISTING PRODUCTION CENTRES (Person-Years)

Total to 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1990 Expected 1991 420 460 470 490 490 440 2 770 200

The uranium mine Zirovski Vrh is wholly owned by the Republic of Slovenia.

URANIUM REQUIREMENTS

The short term nuclear generating capacity projection based on the 632 M W(e) PWR at Krsko and the related uranium requirement projection are shown in the following tables.

INSTALLED NUCLEAR GENERATING CAPACITY* [MW(e)]

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 632 632 632 632 632 632 632 632 632

Secretariat estimate.

ANNUAL REACTOR-RELATED URANIUM REQUIREMENTS* (Tonnes U)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2005 2010 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102

Secretariat estimate.

NATIONAL POLICIES

There is a moratorium in force forbidding the construction of additional nuclear power plants in Yugoslavia.

After the closure of the Zirovski Vrh uranium mine the uranium supply for the Krsko NPP will have to be imported.

234 • Zambia •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

The AGIP-Cogema Joint Venture is continuing uranium exploration in the domes area in northwestern Zambia. Recently, a prefeasibility study on the Cu-U Lumwana occurrence has been done. This occurrence, located within the Mwombezhi dome, is hosted in phlogopite-muscovite- kyanite schists of the lower Roan of the Katanga Supergroup. The resources are reported to be approximately 15 000 tonnes U, based on 0.096 per cent U and a 0.02 per cent U cutoff grade. These resources are not incorporated in the Zambian resource estimate.

In addition, the Geological Survey Department is carrying out orientation studies on uranium occurrences in northwestern Zambia to better determine the controls of the uranium mineralisation.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES - GOVERNMENT

YEAR In Kwachas InUSS 1988 320 000 40 000

1989 500 000 41 000

1990 835 000 32 000

1991* 3 500 000 57 400

Planned.

235 • Zimbabwe •

URANIUM EXPLORATION

Recent and Ongoing Activities

Uranium exploration continues to be carried out by Interuran GmbH of Germany, which in 1987 held the two licence areas Kanyemba and Smith Mine Hill. They are located in the northern and western parts of the country and are underlain by sedimentary rocks of the Karroo. At the end of 1987 the Smith Mine Hill licence was relinquished and exploration concentrated on the Kanyemba area, covering some 550 km2.

In 1989, in addition to some exploration mapping in the area, over 5 000 m drilling was done. In addition, a pre feasibility study was done for the ore body Kanyemba-1.

The work continued in 1990 and included regional reconnaissance mapping, as well as site specific investigation such as drilling, metallurgical tests as well the first portion of an environmental impact study.

Plans for 1991 call for some reduction in the exploration activities, but include the finalization of the technical feasibility study for the mining of the Kanyemba-1 ore body, the establishment of base line values for the environmental impact study, as well as some mapping, drilling and trenching.

URANIUM EXPLORATION EXPENDITURES

YEAR In DM* InUSS 1988 2 500 000 1 429 000 1989 2000 000 1 064 000 1990 1 100 000 680 000 1991** 800 000 468 000

In German Marks, as exploration expenditures incurred by Interuran are expressed in this currency. Planned.

236 Zimbabwe

URANIUM RESOURCES

The known uranium resources of Zimbabwe are associated with the Kanyemba-1 ore body in the northern part of the country, close to the boundary with Mozambique. This deposit is a tabular ore body in the upper Pebbly Arkose braided stream sandstones of the Upper Karroo. It consists of a number of lenses 0.20 - 3 m thick, 20 - 100 m wide and up to 600 m long. The uranium grade is 0.6 per cent U. In addition, there are significant V values.

KNOWN URANIUM RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES (RAR)

Recoverable at costs of up to USS80/kg U Recoverable at costs of between USS80-130/kg U 1 800 -

* As recoverable resources.

In addition, there are speculative uranium resources associated with the entire Karroo belt of the Zambezi Valley.

SPECULATIVE RESOURCES* - AS OF 1ST JANUARY 1991 (Tonnes U)

Recoverable at costs Recoverable at costs Cost Category TOTAL of upto$130/kgU between S130-260/kg U Unassigned 25 000 - - 25 000

As in situ resources.

URANIUM PRODUCTION

There are plans to have a production capability of 350 tonnes U/year in place in 1995, which would be sustained by the RAR recoverable at costs of up to $80/kg U, listed above.

237 Annex 1

MEMBERS OF THE NEA URANIUM GROUP

Australia Mr. G.C. BATTEY Mineral Project Evaluation Branch, Bureau of Mineral Resources, Canberra Mr. R.G. CRICK Uranium and Nuclear Industry Branch, Canberra Dr. G. DURANCE Australian High Commission, London, United Kingdom

Belgium Mr. J. PYPE Synatom, Brussels

Canada Mr. R.M. WILLIAMS (Chairman) Energy, Mines and Resources, Electricity Branch, Energy Sector, Ottawa Dr. V. RUZICKA Geological Survey of Canada, Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa

Finland Mr. O. AIKAS Geological Survey of Finland, Kuopio Dr. K. PUUSTINEN Geological Survey of Finland, Espoo

France Mr. J.-L. BALLERY Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique, Paris Mr. L. DUCHATELLE Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique, Paris

Germany Dr. F. BARTHEL (Vice-Chairman) Bundesanstalt fiir Geowissenschaftcn und Rohstoffe, Hannover

Greece Mr. DAM. GALANOS Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration, Athens

Japan Mr. A. ISHIDO PNC Office, Paris Mr. T. TOMISHIGE Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation, Tokyo

239 Netherlands Mr. S.M. KOOMEN Ministry of Economic Affairs, The Hague

Portugal Mr. L.R. DA COSTA Minist£rio da Industria e Energia, Lisboa

Spain Mr. F. PASTOR ENUSA, Madrid

Sweden Mr. I. LINDHOLM Swedish Nuclear Fuel & Waste Management (SKB), Stockholm

Switzerland Mr. H. BAY Nordostschweizerische Kraftwerke AG, Baden

United Kingdom Prof. P. M.S. JONES UKAEA, London Mr. A. BANKOVSKIS Nuclear Electric pic, Bamwood

United States Mr. J.C. GEIDL Energy Information Administration, Department of Energy, Washington Dr. W.I. FINCH USGS, Denver

CEC Mr. G. VELASCO Directorate General for Energy, DG XVII, Brussels, Belgium

IAEA Dr. E. MULLER-KAHLE (Secretary) Division of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Management, Vienna

OECDINEA Mr. G.H. STEVENS Nuclear Development Division Mr. J.K. JOOSTEN (Secretary) Nuclear Development Division

240 Annex 2

LIST OF REPORTING ORGANISATIONS

Australia: Department of Primary Industries & Energy, G.P.O. Box 858, Canberra, Act 2601

Argentina: Comision Nacional de Energia Atomica, Direccion de Suministros Nucleares, Av. Libertador 8250, 1429 Capital Federal, Buenos Aires

Belgium: Ministere des Affaires Economiques, Administration de l'Energie, 30, rue de Mot, 1040 Brussels

Brazil: CommissSo Nacional de Energia Nuclear, Rua General Severiano, 90 - Botafogo,

22290 Rio de Janeiro

Bulgaria: Geological Committee of Bulgaria, Building G. Dimitrov 22, Sofia

Uranium Company "Rare Metals", Sofia-Bukhovo

Canada: Uranium Supply Division, Electricity Branch, Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, 580 Booth Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A OE4 China: China National Nuclear Corporation, Bureau of Geology, P.O. Box 1436, Beijing 100013

Cuba: Secretaria Ejecutiva para Asuntos Nucleares, P.O. Box 6889, Ciudad de La Habana

Denmark: Ministry of Energy, Mineral Resources Administration for Greenland,

1 Slotholmsgade, 1216 Copenhagen K

Egypt: Nuclear Materials Authority, Maadi P.O Box 530, Cairo

Finland: Geological Survey of Finland, Betonimiehenkuja 4, 02150 Espoo

France: Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique, Direction de l'Approvisionnement en matieres nucteaires, 31 rue de la Fe'd^ration, 75752 Paris Cedex 15 Germany: Bundesanstall fur Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, P.O. Box 510153, 3000 Hannover 51

241 Greece: Institute of Geology & Mineral Exploration (I.G.M.E.), 70 Mcssoghion Street,

Athens 608

Hungary: Mecsek Ore Mining Company, 39-es Dandar ut 19, H - 7633 Pecs

Italy: Italian Delegation to the OECD, 50, rue de Varenne, 75007 Paris

Japan: Science and Technology Agency, 2-2-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Ministry of International Trade and Industry, 1-3-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo

Korea, Rep. of: Korea Electric Power Corporation, 167 Samsung-dong, Kangnam-gu, Seoul 135-791

Mexico: Institute Nacional de Investigaciones Nucleares, Sierra Mojada 447, Piso 2, Colonia Lomas de Barrilaco, 11010 Mexico, D.F.

Netherlands: Ministry of Economic Affairs, Coal and Nuclear Energy Division, P.B. 201O1, 2500 EC The Hague

Portugal: Minist£rio da Industria e Energia, Direcc^o-Geral de Geologia e Minas, Rua Antonio Enes 7, 1097 Lisboa Codex

Romania: Rdgie Autonome de Mdtaux Rares, 68, Rue Dionisie Lupu, Bucarest

South Africa: Atomic Energy Corporation of South Africa, Limited, P.O. Box 582, Pretoria 001

Spain: Empresa Nacional de Uranio, S.A. (ENUSA), Santiago Rusiflol 12, 28040 Madrid

Sweden: Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co. (SKB), Box 5864,

10248 Stockholm

Switzerland: Bundcsamt fur Energiewinschaft (BEW), 3003 Bern

Nordostschweizerische Kraftwerke AG (NOK), 5400 Baden

Turkey: Turkish Atomic Energy Authority, Alagam Sokak N° 9, Cankaya, Ankara

United Kingdom: Nuclear Electric pic, Barnett Way, Bamwood, Gloucester GL4 7RS United States: Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. 20585

242 USSR: Ministry of Geology of the USSR, 4, Marshal Rybalko str., 123 436 Moscow

Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Institute of Geology of Ore Deposits, Petrography, Mineralogy and Geochemistry, Staromonetny per.35, Moscow 109 017

Geologorazvedka Corporation, 4, Marshal Rybalko str., Moscow 123 436

Viet Nam: Viet Nam National Atomic Energy Commission, 59 Ly Thuong Kiet, Hanoi

Yugoslavia: Rudnik Urana Zirovski vrh, Todraz 1, 64224 Gorenja vas

Zambia: Geological Survey Department, Prescribed Minerals and Materials Commission, P.O. Box 50135, Lusaka

Zimbabwe: Geological Survey Department, P.O. Box 8039, Causeway, Harare

243 1 i

Annex 3

GEOLOGIC SETTING OF URANIUM DEPOSITS1

The uranium resources of the world can be assigned on the basis of their geological setting to the following fifteen main categories of uranium ore deposit types arranged according to their approximate economic significance:

1. Unconformity-related deposits 2. Sandstone deposits 3. Quartz-pebble conglomerate deposits 4. Vein deposits 5. Breccia complex deposits 6. Intrusive deposits 7. Phosphorite deposits 8. Collapse breccia pipe deposits 9. Volcanic deposits 10. Surficial deposits 11. Mctasomatite deposits 12. Metamorphite deposits 13. Lignite 14. Black shale deposits 15. Other types of deposits

The main features of these deposits are described below:

1. Unconformity-related deposits

Deposits of the unconformity-related type occur spatially close to major unconformities. Such deposits most commonly developed in intracratonic basins during the period about 1800 - 800 million years ago, but also during Phanerozoic time. Type examples are the ore bodies at Cluff Lake, Key Lake and Rabbit Lake in northern Saskatchewan, Canada, and those in the Alligator Rivers area in northern Australia.

2. Sandstone deposits

Most of the ore deposits of this type are contained in rocks that were deposited under fluvial or marginal marine conditions. Lacustrine and eolian sandstones are also mineralised, but uranium

1. This classification was developed by the IAEA in 1988/89 and replaces the classification defined and used in the Red Books 1986, 1988 and 1990.

244 deposits are much less common in these rocks. The host rocks are almost always medium to coarse-grained poorly sorted sandstones containing pyrite and organic matter of plant origin. The sediments are commonly associated with tuffs. Unoxidised deposits of this type consist of pitchblende and coffinite in arkosic and quartzitic sandstones. Upon weathering, secondary minerals such as camotite, tuyamunite and uranophane are formed.

The Tertiary, Jurassic and Triassic sandstones of the Western Cordillera of the United States account for most of the uranium production in that country. Cretaceous and Permian sandstones are important host rocks in Argentina. Other important uranium deposits are found in Carboniferous deltaic sandstones in Niger, in Permian lacustrine siltstones in France; and in Permian sandstones of the Alpine region. The deposits in Precamtrian marginal marine sandstones in Gabon have also been classified as sandstone deposits.

3. Quartz-pebble conglomerate deposits

Known quartz-pebble conglomerate ores are restricted to a specific period of geologic time. They occur in basal Lower Proterozoic beds unconformably situated above Archaean basement rocks composed of granitic and mctamorphic strata. Commercial deposits are located in Canada and South Africa, and sub-economic occurrences are reported in Brazil and India.

4. Vein deposits

The vein deposits of uranium are those in which uranium minerals fill cavities such as cracks, fissures, pore spaces, breccias and stockworks. The dimensions of the openings have a wide range, from the massive veins of pitchblende at Jachymov, Shinkolobwc and Port Radium to the narrow pitchblende filled cracks, faults and fissures in some of the ore bodies in Europe, Canada and Australia.

5. Breccia complex deposits

Deposits of this group were developed in Proterozoic continental regimes during anorogenic periods. The host rocks include felsic volcanoclastics and sedimentary rocks. The uranium mineralisation occurs in rock sequences immediately overlying granitoid basement complexes. The ores generally contain two phases of mineralisation, an earlier stratabound and a later transgressive one. The main representative of this type is the Olympic Dam deposit in South Australia. Deposits in Zambia, Zaire and the Aillik Group in Labrador, Canada, may also belong to this category.

6. Intrusive deposits

Deposits included in this type arc those associated with intrusive or anatectic rocks of different chemical composition (alaskite, granite, monzonite, peralkaline syenite, carbonatitc and pegmatite). Examples include the Rdssing deposit in Namibia, the uranium occurrences in the porphyry copper deposits such as Bingham Canyon and Twin Butte in USA, the llimaussaq deposit in Greenland, Palabora in South Africa as well as the deposits in the Bancroft area, Canada.

245 7. Phosphorite deposits

Sedimentary phosphorites contain low concentrations of uranium in fine grained apatite. For the purpose of this report uranium of this type is considered an unconventional resource. Examples include the deposits in Florida, USA, where uranium is recovered as a by-product, and the large deposits in North African and Middle-Eastern countries.

8. Collapse breccia pipe deposits

Deposits in this grouping occur in circular, vertical pipes filled with down-dropped fragments. Uranium is concentrated in the permeable breccia matrix and in the accurate fracture zones enclosing the pipe. Type examples are the deposits in the Arizona Strip in Arizona, USA.

9. Volcanic deposits

Uranium deposits of this type are stratabound and structurebound concentrations in acid volcanic rocks. Uranium is commonly associated with molybdenum, fluorine, etc. Type examples are the uranium deposits Michelin in Canada, Nopal I in Chihuahua, Mexico, Macusani in Peru and numerous deposits in China and the USSR.

10. Surficial deposits

Uraniferous surficial deposits may be broadly defined as uraniferous sediments, usually of Tertiary to Recent age which have not been subjected to deep burial and may or may not have been calcified to some degree. The uranium deposits, associated with calcrete, which occur in Australia, Namibia and Somalia in semi-arid areas where water movement is chiefly subterranean are included in this type. Additional environments for uranium deposition include peat and bog, karst caverns as well as pedogenic and structural fills.

11. Metasomatite deposits

Included in this grouping are uranium deposits in alkali metasomatitcs (albitites, acgirinites, alkali-amphibole rocks) commonly intruded by microcline granite. Type examples are the deposits Espinharas in Brazil, Ross Adams in Alaska, USA, as well as the Zheltye Vody deposit in Krivoy Rog area, USSR.

12. Metamorphic deposits

Uranium deposits belonging to this class occur in metasediments and/or metavolcanics generally without direct evidence of post-metamorphic mineralisation. Examples include the deposits at Forstau, Austria.

246 13. Lignite

Deposits of this type, generally classified as unconventional uranium resources occur in lignite and in clay and/or sandstone immediately adjacent to lignite. Examples are uraniferous deposits in the Serres Basin, Greece, North and South Dakota, USA.

14. Black shale deposits

Low concentrations of uranium occur in carbonaceous marine shales. Also these resources are considered unconventional resources for the purpose of this report. Examples include the uraniferous alum shale in Sweden, the Chatanooga Shale in the USA, but also the Chanziping deposit of the "argillaceous-carbonaceous-siliceous-pelitic rocks" type in the Guangxi Autonomous Region in China and the deposit of Gera-Ronneburg, in the eastern part of Germany.

15. Other deposits

Included in this grouping are those deposits which cannot be classified with the deposit types already mentioned. These include the uranium deposits in the Jurassic Todilto Limestone in the Grants district, New Mexico, USA.

247 Annex 4

INDEX OF NATIONAL REPORTS IN RED BOOKS 1965 - 1990

The following index lists all national reports and the year in which these reports were published in the Red Books. A detailed listing of all Red Book editions is shown at the end of this Index.

Countries 1965 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Algeria 1975 1977 1979 1982

Argentina 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Australia 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Austria 1977

Bangladesh 1986 1988

Belgium 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Benin 1990

Bolivia 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986

Botswana 1979 19B3 1986 1988

Brazil 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986

Bulgaria 1990

Cameroon 1977 1982 1983

Canada 1965 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Centr. African Rep. 1970 1973 1977 1979 1986

Chile 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988

China 1990

Colombia 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Cosia Rica 198° 1983 1986 1988 1990

Cote d'lvoire 1982

Cuba 1988

CSFR 1990

Denmark 1965 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 198? 1983 1986 1990 (Greenland)

Dominican Repub. 1982

Ecuador 1977 1982 1983 1986 1988

Egypt 1977 1979 1986 1988 1990

248 El Salvador 1983 1986

Ethiopa 1979 1983 1986

Finland 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

France 1965 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Gabon 1967 1970 1973 1982 1983 1986

Germany 1970 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Ghana 1977 1983

Greece 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Guatemala 1986 1988

Guyana 1979 1982 1983 1986

India 1965 1967 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1990

Indonesia 1977 1986 1988 1990

Iran 1977

Ireland 1979 1982 1983 1986

Italy 1967 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988

Jamaica 1982 1983

Japan 1965 1967 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Jordan 1977 1986 1988 1990

Korea, Republic of 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Lesotho 1988

Liberia 1977 1983

Libyan Arab Jamahiruya 1983

Madagascar 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988

Malaysia 1983 1986 1988 1990

Mali 1986 1988

Mauretania 1990

Mexico 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1986 1990

Morocco 1965 1967 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Namibia 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Netherlands 1982 1983 1986 1990

New Zealand 1967 1977 1979

Niger 1967 1970 1973 1977 1986 1988 1990

Nigeria 1979

Norway 1979 1982 1983

Pakistan 1967

Panama 1983 1988

Paraguay 1983 1986

249 Peru 1977 1979 1983 1986 1988 1990

Philippines 1977 1982 1983 1986 1990

Portugal 1965 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Rwanda 1986

Senegal 1982

Somalia 1977 1979

South Afnca 1965 196? 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986

Spain 1965 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Sri Lanka 1977 1982 1983 1986 1988

Sudan 1977

Sunname 1982 1983

Sweden 1965 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Switzerland 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Syria 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Thailand 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Tanzania 1990

Togo 1979

Turkey 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

United Kingdom 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

USA 1965 1967 1969 1970 1973 1975 1977 1979 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Uruguay 1977 1982 1983 1986 1988 1990

Yugoslavia 1973 1975 1977 1982 1990

Venezuela 1986 1988

Zaire 1967 1973 1977 1988

Zambia 1986 1988 1990

Zimbabwe 1982 1988

SLCCESSIVE RED BOOK EDITIONS SINCE 1965

OECD(ENEA): World Uranium and Thorium Resources, Paris, 1965 OECD(ENEA): Uranium Resources, Revised Estimates, Paris, 1967 OECD(ENEAj/IAEA: Uranium Production and Short Term Demand, Paris, 1969 OECD(ENEA)/lAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris. 1970 OECD(NEA)/IAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1973 OECD(NEA)/IAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1975 OECD(NEA)/lAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1977 OECD(NEA)/1AEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1979 OECD(NEA)/IAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1982 OECD(NEA)/IAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1983 OECD(NEA)/IAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1986 OECD(NEA)/IAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1988 OECD(NEA)/IAEA: Uranium Resources, Production and Demand, Paris, 1990

250 Annex 5

ENERGY CONVERSION FACTORS

The need to establish a set of factors to convert quantities of uranium into common units of energy appeared during recent years with the increasing frequency of requests for such factors applying to the various reactor types.

The NEA has therefore asked organisations of its member countries to provide such factors to be published in this report.

The contributions of these organisations are presented in the following table.

251 Energy values for uranium used in various reactor types (1>

(1 Tonne Natural Uranium = x 1015 Joules)

COUNTRY CANADA HUNCH GKRMANY SWKDKN JAI'AN UK USA

RCACTOR TYM-l CANDl. N4 |>WR HWR WR BWR PWR BWR I'WR MAGNOX ACR BWR I'WR

Bum up |MWd|

a) Natural Uranium or Natural Uranium 8 000 5 848 5 855 5 931 6 250 5 780 5 532 4 694 5 900 NA 4 995 4 893 Equivalent

b) Enriched Uranium 42 500 27 500 32 500 40 000 42 000 33 000 43 400 24 000 33 000 40 000

Uranium Enrichment - 3.6 2.6 3.0 3.2 3.6 3.0 4.1 - 2.9 3.02 3.66 1% WU|

Tails Assay |% "5V\ - 0.25 0.2 0.2 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.30 - NA 0.30 0.30

Efficiency of Converting Thermal Energy into 30% 34.6% NA NA 34.0% 34.5% 33% 34% 26% 40% 32.5% 32.5% Electricity

Thermal Energy Equivalent of 1 Tonne 0.691 0.505 0.506 0.513 0.54 0.50 0.478 0.406 0.512 0.36 0.431 0.423 Natural Uranium |in 10" Joules]"1

Electrical Energy Equivalent of 1 Tonne 0.207 0.175 NA NA 0.184 0.173 0.158 0.140 0.133 0.144 0.140 0.138 Natural Uranium ]tn 10" Joules f

(1) Does not include Pu and U recycle. Does not take into account the requirement of an initial core load which would reduce the equivalence by about 6%, if based on a plant life of about 30 years with a 70% capacity factor.

(2) Does not take into account the energy consumed for U,„ enrichment in LWR and AGR fuel. The factor to be applied to the energy equivalent under the condition of 3% U,„ enrichment and 0.2% tails assay should be multiplied by 0.957. Conversion factors and energy equivalences for fossil fuel (for comparison)

1 cal = 4.196 J

1J = 0.239 cal

(!) 1 tonne of oil equivalent (net, low heat value) = 42 GJ = 1 TOE

(1) 1 tonne of coal equivalent (standard, LHV) = 29.3 GJ = 1 TCE

3 1000 m of natural gas (standard, LHV) = 36 GJ

1 tonne of LNG = 46 GJ

1000 kWh (primary energy) = 9.36 GJ

1 TOE = 10 034 Meal

1 TCE = 7 000 Meal

3 1000 m natural gas = 8 600 Meal

1 tonne LNG = 11 000 Meal

1000 kWh (primary energy) = 2 236 Mcal(2)

1 TCE = 0.697 TOE

1000 m3 natural gas = 0.857 TOE

1 tonne LNG = 1.096 TOE

1000 kWh (primary energy) = 0.223 TOE

1 tonne of fuelwood = 0.380 TOE

1 tonne of uranium (light water reactors, — 10000- 160007 open cycic) 14 000-23 000 T

(1) World Energy Conference standards conversion factors (from Standards Circular No, 1. 11/83).

(2) With 1000 kWh (final consumption) = 860 Meal as WEC conversion factor.

253 Annex 6

CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATES

COUNTRY June 1988 June 1989 June 1990 January 1991

Argentina (ARA) 9.050 175.000 5100.00 5200.00

Australia (AUD) 1.250 1.330 1.330 1.300

Austria (ATS) 12.000 14.100 11.800 10.700

Belgium (BEF) 35.500 41.500 34.400 31.200

Benin (XOF) 287.000 338.000 280.000 258.000

Bulgaria (BGL) 1.310 1.700 3.000 2.770

Canada (CAD) 1.230 1.200 1.180 1.160

China (CNY) 3.710 3.710 4.710 5.210

Colombia (COP) 291.000 371.000 489.000 570.000

Costa Rica (CRC) 73.000 80.000 85.700 103.000

Czech/Slovak FR (CSK) 9.140 9.690 17.000 23.400

Denmark (Greenland) (DKK) 6.500 7.800 6.370 5.800

Egypt (EGP) 2.250 2.570 2.630 2.860

Finland (FIM) 4.020 4.450 3.930 3.630 France (FRF) 5.740 6.760 5.600 5.160

Germany FR (DEM) 1.700 1.990 1.670 1.500

Greece (GRD) 136.000 171.000 164.000 157.000

India (INR) 12.950 16.100 17.100 18.000

Indonesia (IDR) 1654.00 1749.00 1820.00 1890.00

Japan (JPY) 125.000 140.000 150.000 136.000 Jordan (JOD) 0.335 0.567 0.670 0.660

Korea (Republic of) (KRW) 748.000 668.000 694.000 712.000

Malaysia (MYR) 2.560 2.710 2.670 2.700

Mauretania (MRO) 73.000 84.000 83.000 76.000

Mexico (MXP) 2270.00 2440.00 2800.00 2930.00

254 CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATES (continued)

COUNTRY June 1988 June 1989 June 1990 January 1991

Morocco (MAD) 8.040 8.660 8.800 8.000

Namibia NA NA NA NA

Netherlands (NLG) 1.910 2.250 1.880 1.710

Niger (XOF) 287.000 338.000 280.000 258.000

Peru (PEI) 161.000 3600.00 50000.00 500000.00

Philippines (PHP) 20.870 21.190 22.700 27.700

Portugal (PTE) 139.000 165.000 147.000 136.000

South Africa (ZAR) 2.220 2.760 2.610 2.550

Spain (ESP) 112.000 127.000 104.000 97.000

Sweden (SEK) 5.930 6.700 5.060 5.630

Switzerland (CHF) 1.430 1.750 1.410 1.270

Syria (SYP) 11.200 11.200 11.200 11.200

Thailand (THB) 25.150 25.400 25.900 25.200

Turkey (TRL) 1307.00 2070.00 2600.00 2920.00

United Kingdom (GBP) 0.538 0.638 0.588 0.524

United States (USD) 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Uruguay (UYP) 337.000 560.000 1030000.00 1580.0

USSR (SUR) 0.594 0.638 0.609 1.650

Yugoslavia (YUP) 1920.00 13298.00 11.900 10.300

Zambia (ZMK) 7.860 10.430 39.300 51.000

Zimbabwe (ZMD) 1.730 2.050 2.370 2.600

Source: UN/IAEA/ADBF

255 MAIN SALES OLTLETS OF OECD PUBLICATIONS PRINCIPAUX POINTS DE VENTE DES PUBLICATIONS DE L'OCDE

ARGENTINA - ARGENTINE l.ibraine du Commerce International ITALY - ITALIE Carlos Hirsch S.R.L. 10. avenue d'lena l.ibreria Commissionana Sansoni Galeria Gijemes. Florida 165. 4' Ptso 75016 Paris Tel. 40.73.34.60 Via Duca di Calabria l/l 1333 Buenos Aires Tel. (11 331.1787 y 331:391 Librairie Dunod 50125 Fircn/e Tel. 1055) 64.54.15 Telefax: I h 331.1787 I'mversite Paris-Dauphme Telefax: 1055) 64.12.57 Place du Marechal de Lattre de Tassigny Via Bartoiini 29 AUSTRALIA - AUSTRAL1E 75016 Paris Tel. 47.27.18.56 20155 Milano Tel. |02) 36.50.83 DA Book (Aust i Ply. Ltd Librairie Lavoisier 648 Whitehorse Road. P.O.B 163 Editrice e Libreria Herder Mittham. Victoria 3132 Tel. (03) 873.4411 11. rue Lavoisier Piazza Montecitorio 120 75008 Paris Tel 42.65.39.95 Telefax: I03i 873.5679 00186 Roma Tel. 679.46.28 Librairie LCD J Montchresticn Telefax: 678.47.51 AUSTRIA - AUTRICHE 20. rue Soufftot Libreria Hocph Cierold & Co 75005 Paris Tel. 46.33.89.85 Via Hoepli 5 Graben 31 Librairie des Sciences Politique 20121 Mdano Tel. 102) 86.54.46 Wien I Tel. (0222) 5.33.50.14 30. rue Sainl-Guillaume Telefax: (02) 805.28.86 751X17 Paris Tel. 45.48.36.02 BELGIUM - BELGIQUE P.I F. Libreria Scientitica Jean IX1 Lannov 49. boulevard Saint-Michel Dott. Lucio de Biasu Avenue du Roi 202 75IXI5 Paris Tel. 43.25.83 40 Via Coronelli. 6 B-1060 Bnnelles Tel. 102) 538.51.6W538.08.4I 20146 Milano Tel. (02)48.95.45.52 Librairie de rt.'niversite Telefax: (02) 538.08.41 Telefax: (02) 48 95.4: 8 12a. rue Na/arelh CANADA I3KX) A.x-en-Provence Tel. (16)42 26.18.08 Renouf Publishing Company Ltd. Documentation Francaise JAPAN - JAPON OFCD Publications and Information Centre 1294 Algoma Road 165. rue Garibaldi Landic Akasaka Building Ottawa. ON KIB 3W8 Tel. 1613)741.4333 69. France. 1020 Rcnens/I.ausanne Tel, (021)6.35,08,65 Bcsiktas/Istanhul Tel. 160.71 88 Telefax: (021)635.07.80 Telex: 43482B 10 1992 OECD PUBLICATIONS. 2 rue Andre-Pascal. 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16 PRINTED IN FRANCE (6692 37 1) ISBN 92-64-13662-2 - No. 46077 1992