Recent

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

Novogen Limited Message Board

moosefromoz 17 posts  |  Last Activity: Mar 28, 2015 12:09 AM Member since: Jul 16, 2004
  • moosefromoz moosefromoz Mar 28, 2015 12:09 AM Flag

    New Drug against cancer STEM cells Dr. Weeks’ Comment: For the past decade, scientists have know full well that cancer STEM cells, and not cancer TUMOR cells, are the real lethal cancer cell which needs to be targeted in order to reverse cancer process and save lives. I have lectured on that topic in Japan, Germany, Canada, England and across America. Change has been slow in coming because conventional cancer care is profitable. More specifically, oncologists have had no patented profitable weapons with which to target cancer STEM cells, so they continued to urge paying customers (i.e. dying and trusting patients) to allow oncologists to “slash, burn and poison” (i.e surgery, radiation and chemotherapy) the relatively harmless cancer TUMOR cells – despite the fact that standard of care (slash burn and poison) does NOT kill cancer STEM cells.

    To give you a clearer picture, here is an example. Imagine America is being attacked from the north. Our first thought is that Canada is attacking us, so we start counter attacking Canada but the attack from the north continues unabated. Hmmm…. After a while, some smart military intelligence officer clarifies that although the attack is indeed coming from the north, it is actually NOT coming from Canada but from Russia which is launching missiles which fly over Canada towards the USA. Hmmm.. What does the US military do now when it realizes we have been targeting the wrong entity? Well, we should counter-attack Russia, but for the purposes of this example, let’s imagine that we don’t have missiles that can reach Russia. (e.g. we don’t have drugs that can kill cancer STEM cells). In that case, the US army decides to continue bombing Canada. (e.g. continue killing the innocent, relatively harmless cancer TUMOR cells). Seems nonsensical? It is.

    Sentiment: Buy

  • moosefromoz moosefromoz Mar 21, 2015 2:10 AM Flag

    GEH has changed tack, the ESBWR is on the backburner, they will be using a modified version of the ABWR or two newer versions which are on the drawing board right now, they are called RMWR, and RBWR, they are the LWR version to burn used nuclear fuel, the other generation four reactor they also have is called PRISM.

    The Reduced-Moderation Water Reactor (RMWR) is a light water reactor, essentially as used today, with the fuel packed in more tightly to reduce the moderating effect of the water. Considering the BWR variant (resource-renewable BWR - RBWR), only the fuel assemblies and control rods are different. In particular, the fuel assemblies are much shorter, so that they can still be cooled adequately. Ideally they are hexagonal, with Y-shaped control rods. The reduced moderation means that more fissile plutonium is produced and the breeding ratio is around 1 (instead of about 0.6), and much more of the U-238 is converted to Pu-239 and then burned than in a conventional reactor. Burn-up is about 45 GWd/t, with a long cycle. Initial seed (and possibly all) MOX fuel needs to have about 10% Pu. The void reactivity is negative, as in conventional LWR. A Hitachi RBWR design based on the ABWR-II has the central part of each fuel assembly (about 80% of it) with MOX fuel rods and the periphery uranium oxide. In the MOX part, minor actinides are burned as well as recycled plutonium.

    The main rationale for RMWRs is extending the world's uranium resource and providing a bridge to widespread use of fast neutron reactors. Recycled plutonium should be used preferentially in RMWRs rather than as MOX in conventional LWRs, and multiple recycling of plutonium is possible. Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI) started the research on RMWRs in 1997 and then collaborated in the conceptual design study with the Japan Atomic Power Company (JAPCO) in 1998. Hitachi has also been closely involved, with its RBWR concept which has a major aim of burning actinides.

  • moosefromoz moosefromoz Mar 11, 2015 4:51 AM Flag

    Not sure where you get your info from b1g_brothr?
    You certainly need to brush up on your research.

    Google some of this before shooting your mouth off,

    "Advances in laser enrichment may enable relatively low-cost plutonium isotopic separation creating a new unexplored dimension in fuel cycle options."

    "Hitachi developing reactor that burns nuclear waste"

    "Technical Evaluation of the Hitachi Resource-Renewable BWR (RBWR) Design Concept"

    "Hitachi collaborates on TRU-consuming reactor development"

    They didn't shut the shop up, they are just working on an additional method for more power from used nuclear fuel, GLE will be getting Uranium from the tails at Paducah, they will also be getting for next to nothing enriched Uranium from used nuclear fuel and now you can add to that Plutonium with 240Pu removed, they will now have U235 and Pu239 as a new MOX fuel, one that is very very cheap and can be burnt in GEH's ABWR and a newer version of that coming called the SBWR, they dropped the baton on the ESBWR for this so it must be bloody good?

    If any of that comes off? There will be little need fro enriched Uranium well into the forseeable future!

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

  • Reply to

    Generation IV reactors will soon be here.

    by moosefromoz Jan 20, 2015 10:57 PM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz Jan 21, 2015 5:44 PM Flag

    That is no problem for LIS technology, but I believe they can just separate out the U235 leaving everything else behind, you can't do this with centrifuge technology.

  • Google this "report to Congress: Advanced Reactor Licensing August 2012" now look at the figure Figure 5.1, called Potential Future Reactor Licensing on or around page 61, you will notice in that PDF figure 5.1 that generation III LWR's stop being licensed around in around 10 years according to the NRC predictions, they also predict that generation IV reactors (Liquid Metal Reactors) like PRISM will start being licensed around 2018-19.
    GEH has a plan for PRISM reactors that will have an Advanced Recycling Center located on exactly the same site as the PRISM which it itself is co located with an existing LWR and uses all of the existing used nuclear fuel at that site. in that ARC they intend to separate out Plutonium and also the remaining Uranium which is called RepU, to be able to use this RepU they will either have to re enrich the recovered uranium (U235() to a higher degree or separate or only the U235 away from the other actinides, some of which counter the effects of the U235 they are basically a nuclear poison to it. if GEH can do this and I believe they can? then I would suggest that LEU will be in a very precarious position because centrifuge technology cannot do this Isotope Separation effectively, because if this technology of the ARC which is an electro chemical process to separate the Plutonium from the Uranium and they either use laser enrichment or laser Separation (LIS) the latter which I believe is the proffered method, then there will be all the Lightly Enriched Uranium available from the used nuclear fuel to supply the whole of the US for a very long time, same goes for the rest of the world, there will not be any need for the supply of natural Uranium or for the enrichment of that Uranium to LEU, GEH will get this LEU for next to nothing, so I can't see Centrus being a competitor somehow?

    I say this as a heads up, I genuinely feel sorry for you people here hanging on in hope.
    google this S-PRISM Fuel Cycle Study For Session 3: Future Deploym

  • moosefromoz moosefromoz Jan 19, 2015 6:54 PM Flag

    Another arm chair expert, someone who knows next to nothing about the company.
    Of course phase one ,two and three are important, but one of the earlier drugs from exactly the same tree that Novogen first developed was quite successful in phase one and two, but failed in phase three simply because the management back then in their wisdom decided to change the delivery method to oral at the last hurdle (really bad idea) it was called Phenoxodiol.

    The drugs Novogen now have are 1000 times stronger than those older drugs, this is why Yale's Dr Gil Mor, didn't cut and run when the phase three failed back then, they have followed the drugs Novogen has for a very long time now and actually own 15% of one of the drugs, CanTX they are bringing to trials, Yale will get 2% royalty from that collaboration, Yale also stated that they have NEVER seen aside from the drug that Novogen has, a drug by any other drug company, capable of killing both cancer and also stem cell cancers, aside from what Novogen has, but there are also other collaborations they have, one with Weil Cornell Medical School for the development of a drug to treat Glioblastoma for the treatment of Brain Cancer, they also have another collaboration with Genea Biocells to develop Stem cell therapy in a new and novel development to help with the growth of brain stem cells, as well as developing other drugs to treat Degenerative diseases like Parkinson's disease Altzimers and a number of other degenerative illnesses.

    So in your esteemed opinion, are all of those collaborations with highly respected organizations just a waste of time?

  • Reply to

    New DOE Loan Program

    by b1g_brothr Oct 5, 2014 6:56 AM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz Oct 7, 2014 11:46 PM Flag

    "Certainly looks targeted for the ACP!"

    I very much doubt it?
    Points 5,6 and 7 would more than likely stop LEU from applying.
    I believe GLE are the frontrunners.

    see here-:
    "Advanced nuclear facilities for the "front-end" of the nuclear fuel cycle include:
    a) Uranium Conversion. Projects that economically convert U3O8 powder into a gaseous form of uranium hexafluoride with reduced greenhouse gas emissions;
    b) Uranium Enrichment. Projects or facilities that transform natural uranium or uranium tails to a higher isotopic content of U235 including by (1) gas centrifuge or (2) laser isotope separation; and"

    "C. Summary of Application Evaluation Process
    DOE will review each Part I submission to determine whether or not such submission is responsive to the requirements of this Solicitation. DOE’s Part I evaluation will place particular importance on verifying that an Application meets the Project eligibility requirements set forth in II.A, specifically that the Project:
    1. Qualifies as an Advanced Nuclear Energy Facility in the technology areas described herein;
    2. Avoids, reduces, or sequesters anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases;
    3. Employs New or Significantly Improved Technology as compared to Commercial Technology in service in the United States;
    4. Is located in the United States;

    5. Provides a reasonable prospect of repayment of the principal and interest on the Guaranteed Obligation and other Project debt;
    6. Has sufficient funds to carry out the Project; and
    7. Is not benefiting from certain other federal assistance as more fully described in II.A."

    "This Solicitation is designed to provide loan guarantees under Title XVII to support those projects that have the most promising advanced nuclear energy facility technologies. DOE will look favorably on Eligible Projects that will have a catalytic effect on the commercial deployment of future Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects that replicate or extend the innovative feature of the Eligible Project

  • Reply to

    Stock value/Share price performance

    by robey743 Jun 11, 2014 1:05 PM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz Jun 17, 2014 1:48 PM Flag

    A lot of people don't understand just what Silex have, they are only looking at the value of the Uranium enrichment , some of the other stuff they have like Solar Systems, Translucent, and Chronologic will surprise many, when it becomes known just what they really do have.

  • Reply to

    PT: New Wind-Solar Tower Concept

    by lewis_whokeyser May 8, 2014 6:32 AM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz May 15, 2014 8:16 PM Flag

    What a fantastic idea, it's a shame there isn't a great deal of water in the desert though.

  • Reply to

    OT: Coal

    by sponge_bob_is_no_square May 7, 2014 1:27 PM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz May 8, 2014 12:53 AM Flag

    Coal sales are increasing here in Oz, but they are selling it cheaper than they were a short time ago, it's a zero sum game if that keeps happening, those in the know are selling out of coal, from what I have read.

  • Reply to

    Bankruptcy court news on 4/30

    by sponge_bob_is_no_square May 1, 2014 6:57 AM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz May 2, 2014 3:25 AM Flag

    I thought I would take a look , yep it's just like I said DoE managing it and USEC are to be paid as a contractor!

    DOE hiring USEC for up to $118 million in ACP work

    Although the Energy Department’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory is taking over as manager of the project, USEC Inc. will continue work on its advanced uranium enrichment plant under a subcontract with the lab that could provide USEC nearly $120 million

  • Reply to

    Bankruptcy court news on 4/30

    by sponge_bob_is_no_square May 1, 2014 6:57 AM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz May 2, 2014 3:07 AM Flag

    SBINS said " In my view, there's no way that DOE is going to stop supporting ACP, and Usec is its only available dance partner."

    Maybe? but are they still managing the program is has that function been lost?
    Are USEC now just being paid as contractors?
    I don't see USEC building an ACP LEU plant themselves after completion of the R&D, they don't have enough money, even when they do complete the job, they don't own the tech, but I believe they can use it as part of the condition for doing the R&D, but it will cost an absolute fortune, something that USEC does not have, but even if they could raise the money? they would still have to compete with a superior technology named SILEX.
    I have been saying for a long time now that the DoE desperately want the ACP tech to use themselves, they need it so that they can produce special fuel for the TVA in order to be able to get Tritium from their reactors, that is a national security issue and one that can only be addressed by a home grown technology.

  • moosefromoz moosefromoz Apr 11, 2014 10:46 PM Flag

    Enrichment firms sell the service of enriching uranium. Enrichment firms swap low-enriched uranium for natural uranium and cash supplied by their customers. With lower costs for SWU, GLE can deliver a given quantity of low-enriched uranium while using less than all of the uranium supplied by the customer and selling the extra uranium to another customer. When an enrichment firm "underfeeds" uranium it is adding not to the supply of SWU but to the supply of uranium. With a much lower cost of SWU such underfeeding will be a far more important source of cash flow for GLE than for other uranium enrichment plants.

    GE owns 51 percent of GLE. Even a prosperous future for GLE will have little impact on the returns to shareholders of GE. GE has a market cap of $500 Billion so the $4 Billion investment in GLE now planned will not have a material effect on the GE investor. For minority partners Hitachi (HIT) and Cameco their investment in GLE will total about 10% of their total plant and equipment investment if GLE's plants in North Carolina and Kentucky are completed. Even a GLE strategy that lowers SWU prices enough to foreclose all new commercial competition for uranium enrichment will have only a small effect on the prospects of nuclear power as enrichment is about 3% of the cost of nuclear power. Thus even if uranium enrichment were free, the demand for the products of nuclear plant suppliers and operators and most other firms in the nuclear power industry will be only slightly affected. Uranium miners will be more affected by a fall in the price of enrichment as enrichment is a substitute for natural uranium in producing low-enriched uranium. If the cost of enrichment falls, then more enrichment and less natural uranium will be used in producing uranium.

  • moosefromoz moosefromoz Apr 11, 2014 10:43 PM Flag

    continued

    which accumulated in 60 years of operation of the obsolete and recently closed Paducah Kentucky enrichment plant. The 50 million pounds of natural uranium equivalent in the form of uranium hexafluoride that Silex would produce over the life of the enrichment plant are worth $3 Billion at current uranium forward prices. This would over time yield additional royalties of $300 million to Silex.

    GLE's commercial opportunity for the sale of SWU is limited to the growth in the market for enrichment as almost all the cost of uranium enrichment comes from capital costs and current enrichment needs are covered by current SWU capacity and centrifuge enrichment plants currently under construction in New Mexico and France. GLE would have to cut the contract price from the current $120 per SWU to the operating costs of centrifuge enrichment which are almost certainly less than $30 per SWU in order to force the closure of existing centrifuge plants. What GLE is more likely to do is to set a SWU price enough lower than existing prices to make it uneconomic for Urenco to construct new centrifuge enrichment capacity. Nuclear power generation is expected to rise about 30% over the next decade as new plants under construction and planned in China, India, Russia, South Korea, France, Finland and the UAR have a larger generating capacity than the plants likely to close in the US, Japan and Germany so the additional demand for laser enrichment over the next decade is not insignificant.

  • SILEX

    Natural uranium has to be enriched in the fissile isotope U235 in order to be used as a fuel in almost all the world's nuclear reactors. Enrichment represents about 30% of the cost of nuclear fuel. But nuclear fuel represents only 10% of the total cost of nuclear power. The total value of nuclear electricity in the world at wholesale is about $200 Billion per year. The total value of nuclear fuel is about $20 Billion per year. (All valuations in this article are stated in U.S. dollars.)The world enrichment market is worth about $7 billion per year. Two manufacturers of centrifuges, one Russian (Rosatom) and one West European (Enrichment Technology Company) both manufacturing centrifuges designed by Gernot Zippe while a prisoner in the Soviet Union, have over 90% of the uranium enrichment centrifuge market.

    In North Carolina, the first commercial laser cascade to enrich uranium is under construction by Global Laser Enrichment (GLE) under a license from Silex of Australia. In 2012 GLE obtained U.S. Government permission to build a six million SWU per year plant. GLE is building the first cascade of enrichment devices. If that works as projected, the plant will be completed and supply 10% of the world enrichment market. At current forward prices of about $120 per SWU, Silex's royalty will be between 5% and 12% depending on the cost of enrichment at the plant. At current forward prices for enrichment, Silex would collect about $75 million per year at a 10% royalty rate when the plant is completed (projected for 2020). Since GLE's costs per SWU will be about $60, GLE could (and probably would) obtain additional revenues by "underfeeding" their enrichment contracts, that is by using more SWU and less uranium to make the low-enriched uranium they deliver to their utility customers.

    GLE is in exclusive talks with the U.S. Energy Department to build an enrichment plant in Kentucky to "mine" 50 million pounds of uranium by re-enriching the 110,000 tons of tails whi

  • Reply to

    Full Columbus Dispatch article

    by sponge_bob_is_no_square Apr 3, 2014 7:20 PM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz Apr 4, 2014 4:10 AM Flag

    jjpcat if you read the full article you will notice the words that the DoE used

    The DoE certainly think about the ACP as being theirs, especially when you read things like this bit-: “Frankly, it would be very, very desirable to make sure we keep our 120 machines spinning.”

    Especially because the DoE has provided the bulk of the money towards the R and D 80% of it in fact and the technology (Intellectual property) belongs to the DoE as well, and will remain so.

    You will notice that the DoE referred to protecting the IP principally because it is their IP

    See here where they say "OUR 120 machines", I reckon USEC will indeed get some sort of payment maybe when the R and D is finally completed, I believe they will also have the rights to use the technology themselves for an LEU plant, but they wont own the IP themselves, the DoE does and will continue to do so, they (DoE) will also be using the tech themselves in my opinion, possibly at the Y12 enrichment plant, something I have been saying for a long time now.

    I reckon that since the US can't use any foreign tech for weapons enrichment purposes, it became blindingly obvious that the ACP was the only answer for national security of Uranium Enrichment.

    “We have to keep it going this year,” Moniz said, adding that the American Centrifuge Project met all of the goals set by the Department of Energy. “Frankly, it would be very, very desirable to make sure we keep our 120 machines spinning.”

    After the testimony, USEC issued a statement saying it was pleased that Moniz had “confirmed the importance of maintaining a domestic uranium technology to support national-security objectives."

  • Reply to

    DOE & USEC

    by no_name_50 Apr 3, 2014 10:34 AM
    moosefromoz moosefromoz Apr 3, 2014 8:58 PM Flag

    Seems to me kingedxxxxx that the DoE certainly think about the ACP as being theirs, especially when you read things like this bit-: “Frankly, it would be very, very desirable to make sure we keep our 120 machines spinning.”

    Also especially since the DoE has provided the bulk of the money towards the R and D 80% of it in fact and the technology (Intellectual property) belongs to the DoE as well, and will remain so.

    See here where they say "OUR 120 machines", I reckon USEC will indeed get some sort of payment maybe when the R and D is finally completed, I believe they will also have the rights to use the technology themselves for an LEU plant, but they wont own the IP themselves, the DoE does and will continue to do so, they (DoE) will also be using the tech themselves in my opinion, possibly at the Y12 enrichment plant, something I have been saying for a long time now.

    I reckon that since the US can't use any foreign tech for weapons enrichment purposes, it became blindingly obvious that the ACP was the only answer for national security of Uranium Enrichment.

    “We have to keep it going this year,” Moniz said, adding that the American Centrifuge Project met all of the goals set by the Department of Energy. “Frankly, it would be very, very desirable to make sure we keep our 120 machines spinning.”

    After the testimony, USEC issued a statement saying it was pleased that Moniz had “confirmed the importance of maintaining a domestic uranium technology to support national-security objectives."

NVGN
4.26-0.0400(-0.93%)Apr 1 4:00 PMEDT