Africa, Arctic, Arctic oil and gas, Atomenergoprom, AtomRedMetZoloto, Australia, Canada, Canada FIPA, Canada Mining, Chukchi Peninsula, Conquest of the Artic, Energy Metals Corp, Floating Nuclear Power Stations, Gazprom, Icebreakers, Kamchatka Peninsula, Kazakhstan, Kazatomprom, Kola, Mozambique, NAFTA, NAFTA impacts, Nuclear Icebreakers, nuclear power, Nuclear Power Stations, offshore oil and gas, Oil and Gas Arctic, Pevek, Quincy Energy, Rosatom, Rosatom Nuclear Energy State Corporation, Russia, Russia Arctic, Russia Nuclear Icebreakers, Sakha Republic, Tanzania, Taymyr Peninsula, uranium mining, Uranium One, US uranium mining, Vilyuchinsk, Yamal
Yamal Nuclear Icebreaker, Photo by Wofratz via Wikimedia
Subsequent to Russia’s state-owned Rosatom’s acquisition of Uranium One, uranium for fueling Russia’s Nuclear Icebreaker ships and for fueling Russia’s Floating Nuclear Power Stations may come from Uranium One’s Mines in Kazakhstan, the US, Australia, Tanzania (and possibly other countries). Russia’s Floating Nuclear Power Stations, like the Nuclear Icebreakers, will be used mostly in the Arctic, especially by Gazprom for offshore oil and gas field development, as well as for operations on the Kola and Yamal peninsulas. Uranium One executives have apparently stated that US uranium will not be exported to Russia and that the Uranium One properties which Rosatom is most interested in are those of Kazakhstan. On this last point see: http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/russia-seeks-full-buyout-of-uranium-one/article_de7b4e6d-9f05-5e17-b4b4-34a22b913f5d.html as well as Matt Baker’s article below. Those outside of Kazakhstan can but hope that they are telling the truth. Russia already has some uranium mining stakes in Kazakhstan, and has imported uranium from Australia. (We do not really care where the uranium goes; we are opposed to it being mined at all). Upon receiving a link to Matt Baker’s article in our inbox, via nuclear-news.net, we had to wonder if it was true or if it was some paranoid conspiracy theory: “Moscow’s American uranium“, by Matt Baker 10/18/13 http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/moscows-american-uranium-98472.html In this world where reality is often stranger than fiction it is indeed true. Uranium One is (was?) a Toronto based mining company which has been essentially bought by the Russian government (Rosatom). It also has (had) offices in South Africa and Australia.
On Saturday, Reuters reported the news as follows:
“Uranium One to delist shares as Russia’s state nuclear firm takes control”
Posted: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 08:48:03 GMT
MOSCOW, Oct 19(Reuters) – Canadian miner Uranium One Inc, which Russian nuclear corporation Rosatom just took private, will delist from the Toronto Stock Exchange and the Johannesburg Stock Exchange on Oct 21 and Oct 22, respectively, its parent firm said on Saturday.” http://feeds.reuters.com/~r/reuters/companyNews/~3/DLORaCb7VHM/story01.htm They observe that Rosatom “seeks to strengthen its grip on supplies.”
Russia plans to use uranium to power both its icebreaker ships and its offshore oil and gas projects:
“Floating nuclear power stations (Russian: плавучая атомная теплоэлектростанция малой мощности, АТЭС ММ – lit. floating combined heat and power low-power nuclear station) are vessels projected by Rosatom that present self-contained, low-capacity, floating nuclear power plants. The stations are to be mass-built at shipbuilding facilities and then towed to the destination point in coastal waters near a city, a town or an industrial enterprise. Although the world’s first floating nuclear power station was MH-1A built in the 1960s, the Rosatom project represents the first mass production of that kind of vessel. By 2015, at least seven of the vessels are supposed to be built.
Floating nuclear power stations are planned to be used mainly in the Russian Arctic. Five of these will be used by Gazprom for offshore oil and gas field development and for operations on the Kola and Yamal peninsulas. Other locations include Dudinka on the Taymyr Peninsula, Vilyuchinsk on the Kamchatka Peninsula and Pevek on the Chukchi Peninsula. In 2007, Rosatom signed an agreement with the Sakha Republic to build a floating plant for its northern parts, using smaller ABV reactors.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_floating_nuclear_power_station (References at link; bold added for emphasis)
See also: “The first of the two reactors to Russia’s first floating nuclear power plant was lifted onboard on September 27th. The two reactors for Russia’s first floating nuclear power plant to be used in the Arctic are now installed“, by Thomas Nilsen, October 04, 2013, Barentsobserver http://barentsobserver.com/en/energy/2013/10/reactors-onboard-04-10
So, Rosatom manages the Russian fleet of nuclear icebreakers through Atomflot, as well as planning floating nuclear power stations!
Specifically Where are these Uranium Properties?
Although the Uranium One web site only mentions one mine in Australia (Honeymoon), one in the US (Willow Creek in Wyoming), six in Kazakhstan, and a potential project in Tanzania, Wise Uranium.org offers a much more extensive list of Uranium One properties. It is possible that some or most of these were sold. It is also possible that Uranium One has chosen not to mention all properties since it has been sold anyway. The primary subsidiaries were updated by Wise Uranium in July 2013. Subsidiaries of subsidiaries are not as up to date, but the following list still indicates the potential scope of Rosatom’s acquisitions. In the interest of expediency, we leave it to the reader to verify the property holdings listed by wise uranium.org through other online sites (which often don’t allow links anyway). Uranium One should have filings at SEDAR if their online site disappears:
Uranium One Subsidiaries (information updated July 2013) http://www.wise-uranium.org/ucscr.html
(uranium related ones only)
(100%) Honeymoon Project, South Australia
(51%) East Kalkaroo / Honeymoon Extension Project, South Australia
(51%) Goulds Dam / Billeroo Project, South Australia
(51%) Yarramba Prospect, South Australia
– Bonanza South deposit, South Africa
– Rietkuil deposit, South Africa
– Harmony tailings project, South Africa
Shootaring mill, Ticaboo, Utah, USA
(50%) Green River North, Emery County, Utah, USA
(50%) Green River South, Emery County, Utah, USA
(39.2% option) North Hansen deposit, Colorado, USA
(100%) Uranium One USA, Inc.
(100%) Christensen Ranch / Irigaray, Wyoming, USA
(71%) ? El Mesquite (MALCO Texas, USA)
(50%) Karatau LLP, Kazakhstan
(50%) – JSC Akbastau, Kazakhstan
(49.67%) – Zarechnoye joint venture, Kazakhstan
(100%) UrAsia Energy Ltd. (Vancouver-Karzakhstan)
(100%) Energy Metals Corp.: http://www.wise-uranium.org/ucclu.html
Subsidiaries updated 2011:
(uranium related ones only)
100% – Energy Metals Corp (US)
100% – Moore Ranch Uranium Deposit, Wyoming
100% – Ludeman satellite project, Converse County, Wyoming
100% – Antelope property, Wyoming
100% – JAB property, Wyoming
100% – Cyclone property, Wyoming
100% – Nine Mile Lake Deposit, Natrona County, Wyoming
100% – Peterson Uranium Project, Converse County, Wyoming
100% – Red Rim property, Sweetwater County, Wyoming
100% – Battle Spring property, Wyoming
100% – Twin Buttes property, Wyoming
100% – Western Sheep Mountain property, Wyoming
100% – Rocky Draw property, Wyoming
100% – Midway property, Shirley Basin District, Wyoming
100% – Moss Agate property, Shirley Basin District, Wyoming
100% – Laramie property, Shirley Basin District, Wyoming
50% – Wate property, Arizona
100% – 4 1/2 property, Arizona
100% – Rose Pipe property, Arizona
100% – White River Valley property, Nevada
100% – Congress Property, Garfield County, Utah
100% – Velvet property, Utah
100% – Frank M deposit, Utah
Coyote Basin project, Colorado
Maybell project, Colorado
Skull Creek project, Colorado
100% – Standard Uranium Inc.
100% – Western Fuels Inc., Nevada
100% – Clearwater Resources Inc., Arizona
100% – Southwest Uranium Inc., British Columbia
100% – Quincy Energy Corp.
(holdings as of 2006): http://www.wise-uranium.org/ucqgo.html
– (65%) – Hosta Butte project, New Mexico
– (65%) – McKinley property, New Mexico
– (option) – Crownpoint Section 19/29 Property, New Mexico
– (option) – Crownpoint Section 24, New Mexico
– (50%) – Arizona Strip Breccia Pipes
– Horse Creek Property, Natrona County, Wyoming
– (up to 75%) – Aurora Property, Oregon
– (75%) – Elliott Lake Uranium Property
– 100% – High Plains Uranium Inc., New Brunswick/Idaho
– Allemand-Ross property, Wyoming)
Uranium One direct subsidiaries (2013) continued: http://www.wise-uranium.org/ucscr.html
(13.9%) – Mantra Resources Ltd.
Mkuju River project, Tanzania
Bahi North project, Tanzania
Zambezi Valley project, Mozambique http://www.wise-uranium.org/ucscr.html http://www.wise-uranium.org/ucclu.html http://www.wise-uranium.org/ucqgo.html
Rosatom has bought Uranium One via AtomRedMetZoloto (see: http://www.wise-uranium.org/ucarm.html )
According to Wikipedia:
“ARMZ Uranium Holding Co. (AtomRedMetZoloto) is a Russian uranium mining company. It is wholly owned by Atomenergoprom, a part of Rosatom. AtomRedMetZoloto was founded in 1992. In 2008, all uranium mines in Russia as also uranium mining related assets in other countries owned by Rosatom subsidiaries were brought under ARMZ Uranium Holding Co. ARMZ Uranium Holding Co. mines uranium in Russia and Kazakhstan. New operations involve Armenia, Namibia and Canada. In June 2009, ARMZ Uranium Holding Co. acquired 16.6% of shares in the Canadian uranium mining company Uranium One in exchange of 50% in Karetau uranium mining project, a joint venture with Kazatomprom. In December 2010, ARMZ agreed to buy Australian based Mantra Resources for US$1.15 billion. This acquired a stake in a Tanzanian mine.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARMZ_Uranium_Holding (references at link)
ARMZ is in turn owned by Atomenergoprom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomenergoprom
which is owned by Rosatom:
“Rosatom Nuclear Energy State Corporation (Rosatom) (Russian: Росатом), is a state corporation in Russia, the regulatory body of the Russian nuclear complex. It is headquartered in Moscow. The Ministry for Atomic Energy of the Russian Federation (Russian: Министерство по атомной энергии Российской Федерации), or MinAtom (МинАтом), was established on January 29, 1992 as a successor of the Ministry of Nuclear Engineering and Industry of the USSR. It was reorganized as the Federal Agency on Atomic Energy on March 9, 2004. According to the law adopted by the Russian parliament in November 2007, and signed by the President Putin in early December, the agency was transformed to a state corporation. Rosatom controls nuclear power holding Atomenergoprom, nuclear weapons companies, research institutes and nuclear and radiation safety agencies. It also represents Russia in the world in the field of peaceful use of nuclear energy and protection of the non-proliferation regime. Rosatom manages the Russian fleet of nuclear icebreakers through Atomflot. OKB Gidropress, which develops the current Russian nuclear power station range VVER, is a subsidiary of Rosatom. Fennovoima, an electricity company in Finland, announced in September 2013 that it had chosen the Rosatom AES-2006 pressurized water reactor for a proposed power-generating station in Pyhäjoki, Finland. The construction contact is estimated to be worth 6.4 billion euros. Rosatom was directed by Yevgeny Adamov until he was ousted by President Vladimir Putin in 2001. He was replaced by Alexander Rumyantsev (2001–2005). The current head of Rosatom is Sergei Kiriyenko.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosatom
US Backdoor via NAFTA and Canada-Russia FIPA?
Canada has long been the USA’s most overlooked and weakest link whether for terrorism, back-door immigration, mining companies, etc. The main vehicle seems to be NAFTA. Due to its more liberal-lenient immigration policies, people have long migrated to Canada first with the idea of getting Canadian citizenship, and then going to the US under NAFTA. Although we are not experts and don’t know for certain, it would appear that Canada’s FIPA with Russia may have permitted a sort of backdoor access by Russia to the US uranium mines. The following general observations have been made by the Canadian government about FIPAs:
“What types of investments are covered by a FIPA?
Various forms of investment are usually covered by a FIPA. They include tangible assets, such as real estate or other property acquired for business purposes; portfolio investments or other forms of participation in a company or joint venture; intangible assets, such as goodwill; and property rights, such as intellectual property rights.
Does the FIPA eliminate restrictions to invest in the foreign country?
No. The FIPA is not an instrument of liberalization. It can, however, support the goals of liberalization. For example, most FIPAs, but not all, contain provisions that commit Parties not to adopt measures that are more restrictive with respect to investment; and not to reverse any new liberalization measures that they may adopt. That said, the FIPA does not prevent Parties from regulating in the public interest with respect to health, safety and the environment. Parties may also exempt sensitive sectors from the FIPA’s obligations.” http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/fipa-apie/fipa-purpose.aspx?lang=en Notice it says “may”, which means that they may or may not exempt “sensitive sectors”. So, apparently whoever wants to know for sure will have to read the Canada-Russia FIPA AND the US-Canada NAFTA agreements.
For Canada-Australia trade deals see: http://www.tradecommissioner.gc.ca/eng/document.jsp?did=91858&cid=511& For Australia-Russia see: http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/russia/
The Sierra Club explains the negative impacts of NAFTA in conjunction with mining and the environment. It discusses lawsuits by US Mining companies undermining Mexican environmental protection, as well as suits by Canadian Mining Companies undermining US environmental protection: http://www.sierraclub.org/trade/globalization/nafta.aspx Concerns have been expressed about similar problems in the context of Canada’s proposed FIPA with China. In this context NAFTA has been used as a point of comparison.