Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Gilead Sciences Inc. Message Board

b1g_brothr 29 posts  |  Last Activity: Jun 27, 2016 3:37 PM Member since: Jan 28, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • The Swedish parliament has today agreed to abolish a tax on nuclear power as it recognizes nuclear's role in helping it to eventually achieve a goal of 100% renewable generation.

    The framework agreement announced by the Social Democrats, the Moderate Party, the Green Party, the Centre Party and the Christian Democrats, will see the tax phased out over two years. It also allows for the construction of up to ten new nuclear reactors at existing sites, to replace plants as they retire. Setting 2040 as the date at which Sweden should have a 100% renewable electricity system, the document stresses that 2040 is a 'goal' and not a cut-off date for nuclear generation.

    A variable production tax on nuclear power introduced in 1984 was replaced by a tax on installed capacity in 2000. Since its introduction this tax has gradually increased and today corresponds to about 7 öre (0.8 US cents) per kilowatt-hour. In February this year, utility Vattenfall said that the capacity tax had brought its nuclear operating costs to around 32 öre (3.8 US cents) per kWh. However, its revenue from nuclear power generation is only about 22 öre (2.6 US cents) per kWh.

    Swedish utilities had sought redress against the tax through the courts, but the European Court of Justice ruled last October that Sweden could continue to tax nuclear power, deciding the tax is a national, rather than European Commission, matter.

  • Reply to

    OT: The WW2 Japanese Atomic Bomb

    by throckmorton_from Jun 3, 2016 12:08 PM
    b1g_brothr b1g_brothr Jun 22, 2016 7:16 PM Flag

    Domestic trust relationships have broken down in the same way in which America's long term alliances did. Obama replaced institutional arrangements with himself. Suddenly both international and domestic actors were no longer dealing with the United States of America but with a man named Barack Obama. That by itself would not have been fatal, had not this "Barack Obama" lacked an inner core. Thus founded on sand, everything shifted. Both friend and foe -- Israel and Iran for instance -- came to mistrust him. Both China and the Pacific allies suspected his intentions, both Europe and the UK became sure of only one thing: count on him to let you down.

    The collapse of trust relationship was mirrored by a fall-off in respect since deterrence is trust in the negative. Obama's inability to deter China, Russia and ISIS declined in lock step with his regional partnerships as belief spread that he would neither carry out promises nor make good on his threats. In a recent display of contempt, Russian jets simply waited for US Navy fighters to go home before sneaking back and bombing the rebels the administration supported. "With the American jets flying close enough to visually identify the Su-34s, the Russians departed the air space over At Tanf. Some time shortly thereafter, the F/A-18s ran low on fuel and left the area in order to link up with an aerial tanker. That’s when the Su-34s reportedly returned to At Tanf —and bombed the rebels again."

    The revolt is real. The New York Times says "more than 50 State Department diplomats have signed an internal memo sharply critical of the Obama administration’s policy in Syria ... the memo, a draft of which was provided to The New York Times by a State Department official, says American policy has been 'overwhelmed'". Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the current crisis is that Obama has knocked away the props, the tradition, loyalty and myth which once held the centralized nation of the 20th century together.

  • Wall street Journal:
    It’s ironic that while President Obama promotes the construction of nuclear power plants in India, he has done nothing to advance nuclear power in the U.S. (“Obama, Modi Advance Nuclear Project,” World News, June 8). In fact, nuclear power plants in the U.S. are closing at an accelerating rate. At the same time, China, India and other countries are developing their own nuclear power for electrical generation. Nuclear power is the single most effective clean technology widely available today to combat climate change. It is essential that the U.S. continue to develop its domestic nuclear-power capability.

  • Reply to

    USEC Article in Wikipedia

    by lewis_whokeyser Jun 14, 2016 7:58 AM
    b1g_brothr b1g_brothr Jun 15, 2016 11:27 AM Flag

    Every year for the past decade, energy use in the world has increased by about 500 billion kWhs, and lifted another 200 million people up out of abject poverty. In fact, the only way to eradicate global poverty is to provide everyone on Earth with over 3,000 kWhs per year. While this will require a lot more energy, the important question is what mix of sources we want to pursue. But we certainly have enough energy resources to do it.

    The take-away from this discussion is that, while the rich and powerful are still rich and powerful, most of us who would have been peasants a thousand years ago have a much better life than we could have imagined, directly as a result of the energy sources we have developed and continue to develop. Energy inequality is being solved with abundant energy.

    Tackling wealth inequality is a different kettle of fish.

    --Dr. James Conca

  • Noting that nuclear energy was “by far” the largest source of carbon-free energy in the United States, Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz on Tuesday announced $82 million in federal funding for nuclear energy research.

    DOE signThe DOE said the funding would be available for “nuclear energy research, facility access, crosscutting technology development and infrastructure awards.” The funding would be available in 28 states, funding a total of 93 projects “selected to receive funding that will help push innovative nuclear technologies toward commercialization and into the market,” the department said.

    The funding is to be sourced through the Nuclear Energy University Program, Nuclear Sciences User Facilities and Nuclear Energy Enabling Technology programs. In addition to financial support, many of the recipients will receive technical and regulatory assistance through the Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear initiative, which is known as GAIN.

    “These awards will help scientists and engineers as they continue to innovate with advanced nuclear technologies,” Moniz said.

    One particular concern is research into management of nuclear waste, which will be the focus of $21 million of the funding. The DOE needs to “make progress in terms of managing spent fuel,” Moniz said. The $21 million is earmarked for projects involving the Office of Nuclear Energy and the Office of Environmental Management.

    Thirty-six million dollars will be awarded through the Nuclear Energy University Program (NEUP) in support of 49 university-led nuclear energy research and development projects in 24 states. In addition, 15 universities will receive nearly $6 million to research reactor and infrastructure improvements focused on safety-performance and student education-related upgrades to a portion of the nation's 25 research reactors.

  • CNBC ticker shows CTRP at $50, up 8 points.
    No explanation.

  • WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korea has restarted production of plutonium fuel, a senior U.S. State Department official said on Tuesday, showing that it plans to pursue its nuclear weapons program in defiance of international sanctions.

    The U.S. assessment came a day after the U.N. nuclear watchdog said it had "indications" that Pyongyang has reactivated a plant to recover plutonium from spent reactor fuel at Yongbyon, its main nuclear complex.

    The latest developments suggest North Korea's reclusive regime is working to ensure a steady supply of materials for its drive to build warheads, despite tightened international sanctions after its fourth nuclear test in January.

    The U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that Washington is worried by the new plutonium reprocessing effort, but he offered no explicit word on any U.S. response.

    "Everything in North Korea is a cause for concern," the official told Reuters.

  • Reply to

    When will QRVO buy SWKS?

    by richmas Jun 6, 2016 3:31 PM
    b1g_brothr b1g_brothr Jun 7, 2016 10:37 AM Flag

    If you do a one-year comparison chart their stock performance is similar. It is only recently that QRVO stock has begun outperforming. Very frustrating!

    QRVO has a PEG ratio of .91
    SWKS has a PEG ratio of .61

    SWKS is growing faster than QRVO, but both are undervalued. I'm sticking with SWKS for now hoping it will play "catch up".

  • b1g_brothr by b1g_brothr Jun 7, 2016 6:53 AM Flag

    It happened with one-tenth the normal stock volume.

  • Donald Trump says he does not believe that climate change is a significant environmental challenge, and he doubts that humans are contributing factors. “I consider climate change to be not one of our big problems,” he said in September 2015. Trump says the Obama administration has wasted billions of dollars on green energy programs, and says he would as president make cuts at the Environmental Protection Agency. In May 2016, the candidate said he disliked the deal on climate change reached in Paris and would seek to revise the multinational accord. "I will be looking at that very, very seriously, and at a minimum I will be renegotiating those agreements, at a minimum. And at a maximum I may do something else," he said.

    Meanwhile, Trump has called for expanding domestic production of oil and gas, and has said that hydraulic fracturing “will lead to American energy independence.” If elected, he pledges to immediately approve the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that would have delivered hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil daily from Canada to U.S. refineries, but which President Obama vetoed. Construction of the project would have brought “no impact on environment and lots of jobs for the U.S.,” Trump said.

    "I will be looking at [the Paris climate deal] very, very seriously, and at a minimum I will be renegotiating those agreements, at a minimum. And at a maximum I may do something else,"
    --DONALD TRUMP, MAY 16, 2016

  • "The [EPA’s] Clean Power Plan is a crucial tool in our national strategy to reduce carbon pollution, level the playing field for and increase the deployment of renewable energy, and build a clean energy future.
    HILLARY CLINTON, JULY 25, 2015
    Hillary Clinton describes herself as “a proven fighter against the threat of climate change,” having led the Obama administration’s 2012 establishment of a global initiative to reduce short-lived climate pollutants. "

    In July 2015, Clinton said that as president she would aim to “make the United States the world’s clean energy superpower,” and announced two proposals to fight climate change: the installation of more than half a billion solar panels by the end of her first term, and the generation of enough renewable energy to power every U.S. home within ten years. She has vowed to fight Republican efforts in Congress and the courts to undo President Obama's Clean Power Plan, which set carbon emission limits on U.S. states.

    She also says as president she would unveil a “Clean Energy Challenge” (CEC), a broad federal program that would partner with states, cities, and rural communities on renewable energy, power grid resilience, and air pollution control. Among other things, the CEC would extend clean energy tax incentives, expand R&D efforts, and increase U.S. hydropower generation.

    Clinton opposes drilling in the U.S. Arctic and says she is “very skeptical” of the need for energy production off the coast of southeastern states like the Carolinas. She also opposes construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, saying the project distracts from U.S. efforts to combat climate change.

    Clinton has not explicitly voiced support for hydraulic fracturing (also known as fracking), but she has referred to the positive effects of the U.S. natural gas boom.

    As candidate for president in 2008, Clinton proposed three major energy goals: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050; to cut foreign oil imports by 67

  • "I will work toward a 100% clean energy system and create millions of jobs. We have little time to aggressively cut carbon emissions. Transitioning to a 100% clean energy system for electricity, heating, and transportation is possible and affordable. It will create millions of jobs, clean up our air and water and decrease dependence on foreign oil."
    --Bernie Sanders 2015

    As an adamant supporter of the science that acknowledges global warming to be a man-made danger, Bernie is a strong advocate for adopting new climate-neutral energy policies. Bernie has fought for improving access to renewable energy by introducing various bills such as the Residential Energy Savings Act, the Low Income Solar Act, the Green Jobs Act, and the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program. Bernie helped form a public-private partnership, Efficiency Vermont, and has partnered with the National Guard to improve military energy efficiency to make Vermont a leader in clean-energy. Bernie believes that not only should the rest of the U.S. move aggressively toward sustainability, but that we can achieve sustainability while saving money for the majority of American families.

    Energy Efficiency: The United States must transform its energy system away from fossil fuels such as oil and coal, and towards energy-efficient, sustainable, clean, and renewable energy solutions such as wind, solar, and geothermal.

    Financial Access to Renewable Energy: Working families must have access to assistance in implementing sustainable energy practices at home.

    Green Jobs: Sustainable sources of energy will create hundreds of thousands of jobs.

  • b1g_brothr by b1g_brothr May 27, 2016 5:33 PM Flag

    The streaming stock tickers on the bottom of the screen showed one trade for BIDU down 16 points! This was around 4:35 CST.
    No news, probably a mistake but here's the weird thing: The same thing happened last week, one print down 10 points.
    It's making me nervous.
    💀 💀 💀

  • b1g_brothr b1g_brothr May 19, 2016 10:05 AM Flag

    Iran is demanding the U.S. pay for 63 years of “spiritual and material damage.” The Iranian parliament cited examples of U.S. “hostile action” towards Tehran such as alleged U.S. support for a 1953 military coup in Iran.

    This claim is delusional. Iran is one of the leading state sponsors of terrorism and has a long history of inciting violence in the Middle East.

    For instance, it’s known that in 2004 Iran flooded Iraq with improvised explosive devices, which took the lives of 500 soldiers and Marines.

    Jim Phillips, The Heritage Foundation’s senior research fellow for Middle Eastern affairs, notes that:

    This [move] is part of the current regime’s efforts to blame all of Iran’s problems on the U.S., which they denounce as the “Great Satan.”
    The U.S. has always been a convenient scapegoat for Iranian leadership.

    Phillips also notes that:

    Iran has long been in denial about the fact that the 1953 coup was carried out by Iranians. Although the CIA helped them get organized to overthrow Mossadegh, the coup plotters were motivated by their own deep opposition to Mossadegh’s disastrous leadership.

    Blaming the U.S. is a strategic win-win for Iran.

    Iran’s vice president for parliamentary affairs said Iranian courts have ruled the United States owes $50 billion for hostile actions. Obviously, this isn’t really about “spiritual damage” inflicted on Iran.

    Iran’s claim is in direct response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last month demanding Iran hand over nearly $2 billion in frozen assets to the survivors and relatives of those killed in attacks that Iran organized, including the 1983 bombing of a U.S. marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241.

    Shortly after the court ruling, Iranian President Rouhani said Tehran was preparing international legal action to recover the nearly $2 billion in frozen assets.

    “We will not allow the United States to swallow this money so easily” he told a crowd of thousands.

  • More competition:
    Tehran nuclear chief Salehi hails technological progress, says Iran establishing itself as an exporter of nuclear products
    “We are enhancing the industrial section of Iran’s nuclear activities technologically with modern systems and machines,” said Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran who was a key figure in the negotiation of last year’s nuclear deal between Iran and the US-led P5+1 world powers.

    Salehi spoke of advances in enrichment capability, asserting that the quality of process of uranium enrichment in Iran is also progressing, according to the Tehran Times.

    Iran’s IRNA state news agency reported: “Salehi said that Iran’s nuclear program is on the right path naturally and compatible with the strategic plans of the country in a transparent way based on international factors.”

    He also told the envoys, at a conference that focused on the nuclear deal, that Iran is establishing itself as an exporter of nuclear products, including heavy water. “We have improved the country’s situation in the field of the civilian nuclear energy,” Salehi said, according to Iran’s Fars news agency.

    So basically, Centrus can't get a government loan guarentee, but Obama gives Iran $50 billion to improve their program.

  • Reply to

    Nuclear Solutions?

    by vulcanfire May 9, 2016 12:07 PM
    b1g_brothr b1g_brothr May 10, 2016 7:54 AM Flag

    Nothing will happen until a new administration is in place and then it depends on who gets elected. Hillary is very anti-nuclear. Trump is an unknown. Congress may also change hands.

    LEU is targeted by both anti-nuclear liberals and fiscal conservatives who see it as a money pit.

  • A Belgian nuclear power plant may have been the target of an aborted plot by the ISIS cell that carried out this week’s terrorist attacks in Brussels, according to Belgian media.

    If confirmed, the plot would explain why the country’s two nuclear power plants were all but locked down in the immediate aftermath of Tuesday’s bombings — without explanation, and despite being miles away from the Brussels facilities under attack.

    Belgian newspaper La Derniere Heure reported Thursday, based on a police source, that the brothers who died in suicide bombings at the Brussels airport and subway — Khalid and Ibrahim el Bakraoui — had been involved in secret video surveillance of a senior scientist who worked at the Tihange complex.

    The newspaper first reported the discovery of the surveillance video in February, from a camera placed in bushes outside the researcher’s suburban home, and recovered under cover of darkness by two men driving without headlights. Fearing a plot to enter the nuclear complex, authorities ramped up security after the discovery, which a police source told the newspaper may have prompted the plotters to seek out softer targets, namely the airport and subway.

    Prosecutors did not confirm the latest report, which would account for the extraordinary security measures that went into effect March 22 at Tihange and at Belgium’s other nuclear complex, Doel, outside Antwerp to the north of the capital.

    Almost all employees at both facilities were abruptly sent home after the Brussels attacks, amid fears that an “insider” might offer access to terrorists, or, more likely, provide them with material suitable for a “dirty bomb” — a simple explosive used to disperse radioactive material across a wide area, sowing panic. The state broadcaster RTBF reported that 11 workers at Tihange were stripped of access badges since the alert began, four of them after the bombings.

  • Obama administration officials are declining to provide specific details about an unprecedented upcoming purchase of Iranian nuclear materials, an $8.6 million exchange that is likely to be funded using American taxpayer dollars, according to conversations with multiple administration officials and sources in Congress.

    The administration is preparing to purchase from Iran 32 tons of heavy water, a key nuclear material, in a bid to keep Iran in compliance with last summer’s comprehensive nuclear agreement.

    But administration officials have declined to provide specific details to Congress and reporters about how exactly it will pay for the purchase, as well as other information, until the deal has been completed.

    The effort to withhold key information about the purchase, which is likely to be paid in some form using U.S. taxpayer dollars, is causing frustration on Capitol Hill, according to multiple sources who disclosed to the Washington Free Beaconthat the administration is rebuffing congressional attempts to discern further information about the deal.

    Experts further disclosed to the Free Beacon that the exchange is likely to legitimize Iran’s research into plutonium, knowledge that would provide the Islamic Republic with a secondary pathway to a nuclear weapon capability.

    Officials from both the Treasury and Energy departments told the Free Beacon that details about the payment are being withheld until the purchase is complete. Iran is expected to deliver the heavy water to the United States in the “coming weeks,” officials confirmed.

    “We cannot discuss details of the payment until after the purchase is complete,” a Treasury Department official who was not authorized to speak on record told the Free Beacon. “The Department of Energy’s Isotope Program plans to pay Iran approximately $8.6 million dollars for 32 metric tons of heavy water.”

    The administration will use an offshore third party to facilitate the transfer of cash to Iran, according to officials in

  • Reply to

    ConverDyn deal

    by nevrindoubt Apr 12, 2016 7:42 AM
    b1g_brothr b1g_brothr Apr 25, 2016 1:39 PM Flag

    I think it's simpler than that. Centrus and Converdyne work at different points in the process to produce nuclear fuel. There are cost synergies in them working together. Also, look at the locations of the Paducah and Metropolis plants. They're twenty minutes apart.

  • Reuters:

    In January, two Chinese state-owned energy companies, China National Offshore Oil Corp. and China General Nuclear Power Corp., signed a strategic cooperation framework pact on offshore oil and nuclear power.

    China General Nuclear has been developing a small modular nuclear reactor for maritime use, called the ACPR50S, to provide power for offshore oil and gas exploration and production. It expects to begin building a demonstration project in 2017.

    Xu Dazhe, head of China’s atomic safety commission, told reporters in January the floating platforms were in the planning stage and must undergo “strict and scientific demonstrations.”

    Chinese naval expert Li Jie told the Global Times the platforms could power lighthouses, defense facilities, airports and harbors in the South China Sea. “Normally we have to burn oil or coal for power,” Li said.

    It was important to develop a maritime nuclear power platform as changing weather and ocean conditions presented a challenge in transporting fuel to the distant Spratlys, he added.

    China claims almost the entire South China Sea, believed to have huge deposits of oil and gas, and is building islands on reefs to bolster its claims. Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims to parts of the waters, through which about $5 trillion in trade is shipped every year.

GILD
82.27-0.04(-0.05%)Jun 29 4:00 PMEDT