Добавил:
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

книги / 715

.pdf
Скачиваний:
3
Добавлен:
07.06.2023
Размер:
9.65 Mб
Скачать

URANIUM SUPPLY

Table 1.2b. Identified resources (in situ)**

(as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U, rounded to nearest 100 tonnes)

 

Country

 

 

 

 

 

Cost ranges

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Algeria(c)

 

0

0

0

26 000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Argentina(d)

 

3 400

12 700

41 700

43 100

 

Australia(d)

 

 

NA

 

NA

2 668 500

3 007 200

 

Botswana*

 

0

0

118 600

118 600

 

Brazil

 

184 300

314 600

382 300

382 300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Canada(d)

 

351 300

413 800

680 700

1 119 800

 

Central African Republic*

 

0

0

42 700

42 700

 

Chad*(a, e)

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

0

 

3 200

 

Chile(d)

 

0

0

0

1 900

 

China (People’s Republic of)

 

127 800

284 200

370 900

370 900

 

Congo, Dem. Rep.* (a, c)

 

0

0

0

3 600

 

Czech Republic(d)

 

0

0

1 900

197 100

 

Egypt(a, c)

 

0

0

0

2 500

 

Finland(c)

 

0

0

1 500

1 500

 

Gabon(a, c, d)

 

0

0

6 400

7 700

 

Germany(c, d)

 

0

0

0

9 300

 

Greece(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

9 300

 

Greenland(f)

 

0

0

0

227 900

 

Hungary(c)

 

0

0

0

17 900

 

India(e)

 

 

NA

 

NA

 

NA

207 700

 

Indonesia(b)

 

0

2 000

10 100

10 100

 

Iran, Islamic Republic of(b)

 

0

0

8 100

8 100

 

Italy(a, c, d)

 

0

8 100

8 100

8 100

 

Japan(c, d, f)

 

0

0

7 800

7 800

 

Jordan

 

0

0

62 100

62 100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kazakhstan

 

540 500

719 100

956 200

1 031 300

 

Malawi*(d, f)

 

0

0

8 300

19 000

 

Mali

 

0

0

11 900

11 900

 

Mauritania*(f)

 

0

0

18 900

28 700

 

Mexico

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

5 000

 

6 700

 

Mongolia(d)

 

0

144 200

144 200

144 200

 

Namibia*

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

552 500

 

676 700

 

Niger*

 

0

0

341 200

519 400

 

Paraguay*

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

0

 

4 300

 

Peru

 

0

47 700

47 700

47 700

 

Portugal(a, c, d, f)

 

 

 

0

 

7 300

 

9 300

 

9 300

 

Romania*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

8 800

8 800

 

Russia(b, d)

 

 

 

0

 

53 100

 

590 200

 

840 600

 

Slovak Republic(b)

 

0

15 800

19 300

19 300

 

Slovenia(c)

 

 

 

0

 

7 200

 

12 200

 

12 200

 

Somalia*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

10 200

 

South Africa(a, d)

 

 

 

0

 

322 000

 

450 300

 

630 600

 

Spain(d)

 

10 300

36 100

36 100

36 100

 

Sweden*(a, c)

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

12 800

 

12 800

 

Tanzania*(b)

 

0

58 500

72 800

72 800

 

Turkey(b)

 

 

 

0

 

9 700

 

9 700

 

9 700

 

Ukraine(d)

 

0

67 400

130 500

249 100

 

United States(f)

 

 

 

0

 

17 400

 

62 900

 

138 200

 

Uzbekistan*

 

77 100

77 100

179 800

179 800

 

Viet Nam

 

0

0

0

5 200

 

Zambia*

 

0

0

30 100

30 100

 

Zimbabwe(a, c)

 

0

0

0

1 800

 

Total(g)

 

1 294 700

2 618 000

8 122 100

10 652 900

* Secretariat estimate. ** In situ resources do not take into account mining and milling losses. (a) Not reported in 2017 responses; data from previous Red Book. (b) Assessment partially made within the last five years. (c) Assessment not made within the last five years. (d) Recoverable resources were adjusted by the Secretariat to estimate in situ resources using recovery factors provided by countries or estimated by the Secretariat according to the expected production method (Appendix 3). (e) Cost data not provided, therefore resources are reported in the <USD 260/kgU category. (f) Updated from previous report. (g) Totals related to cost ranges <USD 40/kgU and <USD 80/kgU are higher than reported in the tables because certain countries do not report low-cost resource estimates, mainly for reasons of confidentiality.

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

19

URANIUM SUPPLY

Table 1.2c. Comparison of in situ and recoverable identified resources

(as of 1 January 2017)

Identified resources

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total in situ (tU)

 

1 294 700

 

2 618 000

8 122 100

 

10 652 900

Total recoverable (tU)

 

1 057 700

 

2 079 500

6 142 200

 

7 988 600

Difference (tU)

 

237 000

 

538 500

1 979 900

 

2 664 300

% difference

 

22.4

 

25.9

32.2

 

33.4

Table 1.3a. Reasonably assured resources (recoverable)

(as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U, rounded to nearest 100 tonnes)

 

Country

 

 

 

Cost ranges

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

<USD 80/kgU

<USD 130/kgU

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

Algeria(c, d)

 

0

0

0

19 500

 

Argentina

 

0

5 100

11 000

11 000

 

Australia

 

NA

NA

1 269 800

1 400 600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Botswana*

 

0

0

13 700

13 700

 

Brazil(d)

 

138 100

155 900

155 900

155 900

 

Canada

 

255 900

275 200

409 700

592 900

 

Central African Republic*(a, c)

 

0

0

32 000

32 000

 

Chile

 

0

0

0

600

 

China (People’s Republic of)(d)

 

44 300

102 200

136 700

136 700

 

Congo, Dem. Rep.*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

1 400

 

Czech Republic

 

0

0

1 200

50 700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finland(c, d)

 

0

0

1 200

1 200

 

Gabon(a, c)

 

0

0

4 800

4 800

 

Germany(c)

 

0

0

0

3 000

 

Greece(a, c)

 

0

0

0

1 000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Greenland(d, f)

 

0

0

0

66 800

 

India(d, e)

 

NA

NA

NA

149 000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Indonesia(b, d)

 

0

1 500

5 300

5 300

 

Iran, Islamic Republic of (b, d)

 

0

0

1 100

1 100

 

Italy(a, c)

 

0

4 800

4 800

4 800

 

Japan(c)

 

0

0

6 600

6 600

 

Jordan(d)

 

0

0

4 800

4 800

 

Kazakhstan(d)

 

227 900

304 400

415 200

434 800

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Malawi*

 

0

0

4 400

9 700

 

Mali(d)

 

0

0

5 000

5 000

 

Mauritania*

 

NA

NA

700

1 000

 

Mexico(d)

 

0

0

1 800

1 800

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mongolia

 

0

49 800

49 800

49 800

 

Namibia*

 

0

0

335 300

368 500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Niger*

 

0

0

237 400

336 400

 

Paraguay*

 

0

0

0

2 900

 

Peru(d)

 

0

14 000

14 000

14 000

 

Portugal(a, c)

 

0

4 500

6 000

6 000

 

Romania*(a, c)

 

0

0

3 000

3 000

 

Russia(b)

 

0

24 500

214 500

260 000

 

Slovak Republic(b, d)

 

0

8 800

8 800

8 800

 

Slovenia(c, d)

 

0

1 700

1 700

1 700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Somalia*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

5 000

 

South Africa(a)

 

0

167 900

237 600

259 600

 

Spain

 

9 800

23 000

23 000

23 000

 

Sweden*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

4 900

4 900

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tanzania*(b)

 

0

38 300

39 700

39 700

 

Turkey(b, d)

 

0

6 500

6 500

6 500

 

Ukraine

 

0

41 300

81 200

137 700

 

United States(d, f)

 

0

13 100

47 200

100 800

 

Uzbekistan*

 

37 400

37 400

57 600

57 600

 

Viet Nam(d)

 

0

0

0

900

 

Zambia*

 

0

0

11 100

11 100

 

Zimbabwe(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

1 400

 

Total(g)

 

713 400

1 279 900

3 865 000

4 815 000

See notes on page 21.

20

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

URANIUM SUPPLY

Table 1.3b. Reasonably assured resources (in situ)

(as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U, rounded to nearest 100 tonnes)

 

Country

 

 

 

 

 

Cost ranges

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Algeria(c)

 

0

0

0

26 000

 

Argentina(d)

 

0

7 100

15 300

15 300

 

Australia(d)

 

 

NA

 

NA

1 877 900

2 070 000

 

Botswana*

 

0

0

22 100

22 100

 

Brazil

 

184 300

209 700

209 700

209 700

 

Canada(d)

 

341 200

366 900

543 200

784 900

 

Central African Republic*

 

0

0

42 700

42 700

 

Chile(d)

 

0

0

0

700

 

China (People’s Republic of)

 

58 200

133 800

177 700

177 700

 

Congo, Dem. Rep.*(a, c)

 

0

0

0

1 900

 

Czech Republic(d)

 

0

0

1 800

83 700

 

Finland(c)

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

1 500

 

1 500

 

Gabon(a, c, d)

 

0

0

6 400

6 400

 

Germany(c, d)

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

0

 

4 000

 

Greece(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

1 300

 

Greenland(f)

 

0

0

0

102 800

 

India(e)

 

 

NA

 

NA

 

NA

197 200

 

Indonesia(b)

 

0

2 000

7 100

7 100

 

Iran, Islamic Republic of(b)

 

0

0

1 400

1 400

 

Italy(a, c, d)

 

0

6 400

6 400

6 400

 

Japan(c, d, f)

 

0

0

7 800

7 800

 

Jordan

 

0

0

6 900

6 900

 

Kazakhstan

 

256 000

342 300

471 200

494 800

 

Malawi*(d)

 

0

0

5 500

13 000

 

Mali

 

0

0

6 700

6 700

 

Mauritania*

 

0

0

800

1 200

 

Mexico

 

0

0

2 400

2 400

 

Mongolia(d)

 

0

64 200

64 200

64 200

 

Namibia*

 

0

0

419 100

460 600

 

Niger*

 

0

0

287 400

405 200

 

Paraguay*

 

0

0

0

3 400

 

Peru

 

0

20 000

20 000

20 000

 

Portugal(a, c, d)

 

0

6 000

8 000

8 000

 

Romania*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

4 000

4 000

 

Russia(b, d)

 

0

32 700

258 400

328 300

 

Slovak Republic(b)

 

 

 

0

 

10 900

 

10 900

 

10 900

 

Slovenia(c)

 

0

2 200

2 200

2 200

 

Somalia*(a, c, d)

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

0

 

6 700

 

South Africa(a, d)

 

0

239 800

338 100

369 100

 

Spain(d)

 

10 300

24 200

24 200

24 200

 

Sweden*(a, c)

 

0

0

6 500

6 500

 

Tanzania*(b)

 

0

47 900

49 600

49 600

 

Turkey(b)

 

0

9 000

9 000

9 000

 

Ukraine(d)

 

0

48 100

93 200

157 200

 

United States(f)

 

0

17 400

62 900

138 200

 

Uzbekistan*

 

46 700

46 700

72 000

72 000

 

Viet Nam

 

0

0

0

1 200

 

Zambia*

 

0

0

12 300

12 300

 

Zimbabwe(a, c)

 

0

0

0

1 800

 

Total(g)

 

896 700

1 637 300

5 156 500

6 450 200

* Secretariat estimate. (a) Not reported in 2017 responses; data from previous Red Book. (b) Assessment partially made within the last five years. (c) Assessment not made within the last five years. (d) Resources were adjusted by the Secretariat to estimate in situ resources using recovery factors provided by countries or estimated by the Secretariat according to the expected production method (Appendix 3). (e) Cost data not provided, therefore resources are reported in the <USD 260/kgU category.

(f) Updated from previous report. (g) Totals related to cost ranges <USD 40/kgU and <USD 80/kgU are higher than reported in the tables because certain countries do not report low-cost resource estimates, mainly for reasons of confidentiality.

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

21

URANIUM SUPPLY

Table 1.4a. Inferred resources (recoverable)

(as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U, rounded to nearest 100 tonnes)

 

Country

 

 

 

 

 

Cost ranges

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Argentina

 

2 400

4 000

19 000

20 000

 

Australia

 

 

NA

 

NA

548 500

654 200

 

Botswana*

 

0

0

59 800

59 800

 

Brazil(d)

 

0

73 500

120 900

120 900

 

Canada

 

7 600

35 200

104 700

253 500

 

Chad*(a, c, d, e)

 

0

0

0

2 400

 

Chile

 

0

0

0

900

 

China (People’s Republic of)(d)

 

56 900

120 300

153 700

153 700

 

Congo, Dem. Rep.*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

1 300

 

Czech Republic

 

0

0

100

68 200

 

Egypt(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

1 900

 

Gabon(a, c)

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

0

 

1 000

 

Germany(c)

 

0

0

0

4 000

 

Greece(a, c)

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

0

 

6 000

 

Greenland(d, f)

 

0

0

0

81 300

 

Hungary(c, d)

 

0

0

0

13 500

 

India(d, e)

 

 

NA

 

NA

 

NA

8 000

 

Indonesia(b, d)

 

0

0

2 200

2 200

 

Iran, Islamic Republic of(b, d)

 

0

0

5 100

5 100

 

Italy(a, c)

 

0

1 300

1 300

1 300

 

Jordan(d)

 

0

0

38 600

38 600

 

Kazakhstan(d)

 

253 200

335 100

427 000

469 700

 

Malawi*

 

0

0

1 800

4 600

 

Mali(d)

 

0

0

3 900

3 900

 

Mauritania*

 

0

0

15 700

22 800

 

Mexico(d)

 

0

0

1 900

3 200

 

Mongolia

 

0

63 800

63 800

63 800

 

Namibia*

 

0

0

106 800

172 900

 

Niger*

 

0

0

42 600

89 200

 

Paraguay*

 

0

0

0

700

 

Peru(d)

 

0

19 400

19 400

19 400

 

Portugal(a, c)

 

0

1 000

1 000

1 000

 

Romania*(a, c)

 

0

0

3 600

3 600

 

Russia(b)

 

0

15 300

271 000

396 900

 

Slovak Republic(b, d)

 

0

3 900

6 700

6 700

 

Slovenia(c, d)

 

 

 

0

 

3 800

 

7 500

 

7 500

 

Somalia*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

2 600

 

South Africa(a)

 

 

 

0

 

61 700

 

84 800

 

189 700

 

Spain

 

0

11 400

11 400

11 400

 

Sweden*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

4 700

4 700

 

Tanzania*(b)

 

0

8 500

18 500

18 500

 

Turkey(b, d)

 

0

500

500

500

 

Ukraine

 

0

16 900

32 900

81 300

 

Uzbekistan*

 

24 300

24 300

81 500

81 500

 

Viet Nam(d)

 

0

0

0

3 000

 

Zambia*

 

0

0

16 100

16 100

 

Total(g)

 

344 400

799 900

2 277 000

3 173 000

* Secretariat estimate. (a) Not reported in 2017 responses; data from previous Red Book. (b) Assessment partially made within the last five years. (c) Assessment not made within the last five years. (d) In situ resources were adjusted by the Secretariat to estimate recoverable resources using recovery factors provided by countries or estimated by the Secretariat according to the expected production method (Appendix 3). (e) Cost data not provided, therefore resources are reported in the <USD 260/kgU category.

(f) Updated to report recoverable resources. (g) Totals related to cost ranges <USD 40/kgU and <USD 80/kgU are higher than reported in the tables because certain countries do not report low-cost resource estimates, mainly for reasons of confidentiality.

22

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

URANIUM SUPPLY

Table 1.4b. Inferred resources (in situ)

(as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U, rounded to nearest 100 tonnes)

 

Country

 

 

 

 

 

Cost ranges

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Argentina(d)

 

3 400

5 600

26 400

27 800

 

Australia(d)

 

 

NA

 

NA

790 600

937 200

 

Botswana*

 

0

0

96 500

96 500

 

Brazil

 

0

104 900

172 600

172 600

 

Canada(d)

 

10 100

46 900

137 500

334 900

 

Chad*(a, e)

 

0

0

0

3 200

 

Chile(d)

 

0

0

0

1 200

 

China (People’s Republic of)

 

69 600

150 400

193 200

193 200

 

Congo, Dem. Rep.*(a, c)

 

0

0

0

1 700

 

Czech Republic (d)

 

 

 

0

 

0

 

100

 

113 400

 

Egypt(a, c)

 

0

0

0

2 500

 

Gabon(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

1 300

 

Germany(c, d)

 

0

0

0

5 300

 

Greece(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

8 000

 

Greenland(f)

 

0

0

0

125 100

 

Hungary(c)

 

0

0

0

17 900

 

India(e)

 

 

NA

 

NA

 

NA

10 500

 

Indonesia(b)

 

0

0

3 000

3 000

 

Iran, Islamic Republic of(b)

 

0

0

6 700

6 700

 

Italy(a, c, d)

 

0

1 700

1 700

1 700

 

Jordan

 

0

0

55 200

55 200

 

Kazakhstan

 

284 500

376 800

485 000

536 500

 

Malawi*(d)

 

0

0

2 800

6 000

 

Mali

 

0

0

5 200

5 200

 

Mauritania*

 

0

0

18 100

27 500

 

Mexico

 

0

0

2 600

4 300

 

Mongolia(d)

 

0

80 000

80 000

80 000

 

Namibia*

 

0

0

133 400

216 100

 

Niger*

 

0

0

53 800

114 200

 

Paraguay*

 

0

0

0

900

 

Peru

 

0

27 700

27 700

27 700

 

Portugal(a, c, d)

 

0

1 300

1 300

1 300

 

Romania*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

4 800

4 800

 

Russia (b, d)

 

 

 

0

 

20 400

 

331 800

 

512 300

 

Slovak Republic(b)

 

0

4 900

8 400

8 400

 

Slovenia(c)

 

 

 

0

 

5 000

 

10 000

 

10 000

 

Somalia*(a, c, d)

 

0

0

0

3 500

 

South Africa(a, d)

 

0

82 200

112 200

261 500

 

Spain(d)

 

0

11 900

11 900

11 900

 

Sweden*(a, c)

 

0

0

6 300

6 300

 

Tanzania*(b)

 

0

10 600

23 200

23 200

 

Turkey(b)

 

0

700

700

700

 

Ukraine(d)

 

0

19 300

37 300

91 900

 

Uzbekistan*

 

30 400

30 400

107 800

107 800

 

Viet Nam

 

0

0

0

4 000

 

Zambia*

 

0

0

17 800

17 800

 

Total(g)

 

398 000

980 700

2 965 600

4 202 700

* Secretariat estimate. (a) Not reported in 2017 responses; data from previous Red Book. (b) Assessment partially made within the last five years. (c) Assessment not made within the last five years. (d) Recoverable resources were adjusted by the Secretariat to estimate in situ resources using recovery factors provided by countries or estimated by the Secretariat according to the expected production method(Appendix 3). (e) Cost data not provided, therefore resources are reported in the <USD 260/kgU category.

(f) Updated from previous report. (g) Totals related to cost ranges <USD 40/kgU and <USD 80/kgU are higher than reported in the tables because certain countries do not report low-cost resource estimates, mainly for reasons of confidentiality.

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

23

URANIUM SUPPLY

Table 1.5. Major identified resource changes by country

(recoverable resources in 1 000 tonnes U)

Country

Resource category

 

2015

2017

 

Changes

 

Reasons

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

8.6

11.0

 

2.4

 

Private industry resource holdings evaluated and

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

8.6

11.0

 

2.4

 

 

Argentina

 

 

 

incorporated into national resource totals for first

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

time.

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

9.9

19.0

 

9.1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

11.0

20.0

 

9.0

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

1 135.2

1 269.8

 

134.6

 

Additional resources defined at known deposits and

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

1 150.0

1 400.6

 

250.6

 

 

Australia

 

 

 

reclassification of known resources due to changes

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

in access.

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

528.9

548.5

 

19.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

630.8

654.2

 

23.4

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

226.1

225.9

 

-0.2

 

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

240.1

275.2

 

35.1

 

Decrease in identified resources in the USD <40/kgU

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

374.2

409.7

 

35.5

 

and USD <80/KgU cost categories due to mining

 

Canada

<USD 260/kgU

 

486.5

592.9

 

106.4

 

depletion. Increase of the total resources in the

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

higher cost categories due to new resources

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

25.1

7.6

 

-17.5

 

identified as the result of exploration activities

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

81.8

35.2

 

-46.6

 

(i.e. Arrow, Phoenix, Griffon and Triple R deposits).

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

134.8

104.7

 

-30.1

 

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

217.2

253.5

 

36.3

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

38.9

44.3

 

5.4

 

Increases partly as a result of exploration of

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

95.0

102.2

 

7.2

 

sandstones in the north and, to a lesser extent,

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

128.3

136.7

 

8.4

 

exploration of volcanic and granite-type deposits in

 

China (People’s

<USD 260/kgU

 

128.3

136.7

 

8.4

 

southern China.

 

Republic of)

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, ISL (acid) recovery factor change accounts

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

60.0

56.9

 

-3.1

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

111.2

120.3

 

9.1

 

for the majority of the increases, since China reports

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

144.2

153.7

 

9.5

 

in situ resources.

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

144.2

153.7

 

9.5

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

Additional exploration defines additional resources

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

121.0

149.0

 

28.0

 

 

India

 

 

 

at existing deposits and converts inferred to

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

reasonably assured resources.

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

17.7

8.0

 

-9.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Iran, Islamic

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ongoing exploration within previously surveyed

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

2.7

5.1

 

2.4

 

 

Republic of

 

 

 

areas defines additional resources.

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

2.7

5.1

 

2.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD130/kgU

 

0.0

4.8

 

4.8

 

Re-evaluation of known resources defines first

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

0.0

4.8

 

4.8

 

 

Jordan

 

 

 

reasonably assured resources and reduces overall

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

resources.

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

47.7

38.6

 

-9.1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

47.7

38.6

 

-9.1

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

38.5

227.9

 

189.4

 

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

229.3

304.4

 

75.1

 

Overall increases in identified resources a result of

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

275.8

415.2

 

139.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

exploration activities. Decrease in inferred category

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

363.2

434.8

 

71.6

 

 

Kazakhstan

 

 

 

as resources transferred to reasonably assured

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

resources. Significant changes in cost categories

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

59.0

253.2

 

194.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

owing to devaluation of the national currency.

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

437.9

335.1

 

-102.8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

469.5

427.0

 

-42.5

 

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

578.4

469.7

 

-108.7

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

8.5

5.0

 

-3.5

 

 

 

Mali

<USD 260/kgU

 

8.5

5.0

 

-3.5

 

Decline in identified resources as a result of

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

re-evaluation of existing deposits.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

4.5

3.9

 

-0.6

 

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

4.5

3.9

 

-0.6

 

 

 

24

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

URANIUM SUPPLY

Table 1.5. Major identified resource changes by country (cont’d)

(recoverable resources in 1 000 tonnes U)

Country

Resource category

 

2015

 

2017

 

Changes

 

Reasons

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

1.2

 

0.0

 

-1.2

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

1.8

 

1.8

 

0.0

 

Re-evaluation of existing deposits following

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

1.8

 

1.8

 

0.0

 

 

 

 

 

 

international standards results in decline of lower

Mexico

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cost resources and increase in higher cost inferred

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

0.6

 

0.0

 

-0.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

resources.

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

0.6

 

0.0

 

-0.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

0.9

 

1.9

 

1.0

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

1.6

 

3.2

 

1.6

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

108.1

 

119.4

 

11.3

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

108.1

 

119.4

 

11.3

 

Ongoing exploration activities in southern basins

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

108.1

 

119.4

 

11.3

 

Mongolia

 

 

 

 

focusing on sandstone deposits amenable to ISL

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mining results in increased RAR.

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

33.4

 

31.8

 

-1.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

33.4

 

31.8

 

-1.6

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

33.4

 

31.8

 

-1.6

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

189.6

 

335.3

 

145.7

 

Ongoing exploration identifies additional resources

Namibia

<USD 260/kgU

 

298.4

 

368.5

 

70.1

 

in south Rössing (Z20 deposit) and more

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

comprehensive historic data for all uranium

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

77.5

 

106.8

 

29.3

 

projects.

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

164.6

 

172.9

 

8.3

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

17.7

 

0.0

 

-17.7

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

235.3

 

237.4

 

2.1

 

Ongoing exploration defines additional resources at

Niger

<USD 260/kgU

 

316.0

 

336.4

 

20.4

 

 

 

 

 

developing deposits (e.g. Madaouela and Dasa).

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

56.2

 

42.6

 

-13.6

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

95.3

 

89.2

 

-6.1

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

27.3

 

24.5

 

-2.8

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

228.4

 

214.5

 

-13.9

 

Ongoing comprehensive exploration and technical

Russia

<USD 260/kgU

 

273.8

 

260.0

 

-13.8

 

economic evaluation of resources results in resource

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

reductions due to increased costs and depletion by

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

20.4

 

15.3

 

-5.1

 

mining.

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

279.4

 

271.0

 

-8.4

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

421.4

 

396.9

 

-24.5

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

0.0

 

9.8

 

9.8

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

0.0

 

23.0

 

23.0

 

Ongoing exploration focusing on a number of

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

0.0

 

23.0

 

23.0

 

historically known uranium projects in Salamanca

Spain

<USD 260/kgU

 

12.9

 

23.0

 

10.1

 

province, leads to increased resources as the

 

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

country works towards open-pit mining of four

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

0.0

 

11.4

 

11.4

 

deposits.

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

0.0

 

11.4

 

11.4

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

21.0

 

11.4

 

-9.6

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

36.9

 

37.4

 

0.5

 

 

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

36.9

 

37.4

 

0.5

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

54.6

 

57.6

 

3.0

 

Ongoing exploration of sandstone deposits in the

Uzbekistan

<USD 260/kgU

 

54.6

 

57.6

 

3.0

 

Central Kyzylkum area and black shale deposits in

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the Boztau area identifies additional resources to

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

21.3

 

24.3

 

3.0

 

support ongoing mining.

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

21.3

 

24.3

 

3.0

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

75.5

 

81.5

 

6.0

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

75.5

 

81.5

 

6.0

 

 

 

RAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

9.9

 

11.1

 

1.2

 

Overall increase resulting from recovery factor

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

9.9

 

11.1

 

1.2

 

Zambia

 

 

 

 

increase (80 to 90.5%) as development of existing

Inferred

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

deposits continues.

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

14.7

 

16.1

 

1.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

14.7

 

16.1

 

1.4

 

 

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

25

URANIUM SUPPLY

Figure 1.2. Distribution of reasonably assured resources among countries with a significant share of resources

1 000 tU

1 600

 

 

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

USD 40-80/kgU

1 400

 

 

USD 80-130/kgU

USD 130-260/kgU

 

1 200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 000

 

 

 

 

 

 

800

 

 

 

 

 

 

600

 

 

 

 

 

 

400

 

 

 

 

 

 

200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* Secretariat estimate.

Figure 1.3. Distribution of inferred resources among countries with a significant share of resources

1 000 tU

700

 

 

<USD 40/kgU

USD 40-80/kgU

 

 

 

 

600

 

 

USD 80-130/kgU

USD 130-260/kgU

 

 

 

500

 

 

 

 

400

 

 

 

 

300

 

 

 

 

200

 

 

 

 

100

 

 

 

 

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* Secretariat estimate.

Distribution of resources by production method

For this report, countries once again were asked to report identified resources by cost categories and by the expected production method, i.e. open-pit or underground mining, in situ leaching (ISL, sometimes referred to as in situ recovery, or ISR), heap leaching or in-place leaching, co-product/by-product or unspecified.

26

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

URANIUM SUPPLY

In the lowest cost category, <USD 40/kgU, underground mining is the predominant production method for RAR (see Table 1.6), mainly from Canada and to a lesser extent from Brazil. Resources in the ISL categories from China and Kazakhstan make a significant contribution along with co-product/by-product production, mainly from Brazil, making up most of the rest. The total is likely underestimated because of the difficulty in assigning mining costs accurately in the co-product/by-product category, particularly in Australia. In the <USD 80/kgU category, resources produced by underground mining and ISL methods make the largest contributions. The <USD 130/kgU category is dominated by resources in the co-product category; this is predominately a result of the world-class Olympic Dam deposit in Australia. The underground and co-product/by-product categories dominate in the <USD 260/kgU category (see Table 1.6), which is followed by open-pit mining that has shown a gradual decrease in the last couple of editions. Canada holds the largest resource total for underground mining while Namibia and Niger make the largest contributions to open-pit production. Olympic Dam is responsible for most of the by-product category, with Brazil, Greenland and South Africa making significant contributions. ISL makes an important contribution in all cost categories with Kazakhstan being the major player.

Table 1.6. Reasonably assured resources by production method

(recoverable resources as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U)

Production method

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Open-pit mining

 

18 089

 

96 787

908 839

 

1 078 486

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Underground mining

 

320 784

 

449 777

1 002 018

 

1 464 394

In situ leaching acid

 

283 173

 

428 108

524 479

 

586 705

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In situ leaching alkaline

 

20 300

 

27 720

30 100

 

70 704

Co-product/by-product

 

71 050

 

256 704

1 308 131

 

1 537 926

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unspecified

 

-

 

20 822

91 336

 

76 664

Total

 

713 396

 

1 279 918

3 864 903

 

4 814 879

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The pattern of production method for IR is slightly different from that of RAR (see Table 1.7). In the lowest cost categories (<USD 40/kgU and <USD 80/kgU) ISL is dominant. In the <USD 130/kgU category, ISL continues to dominate but is followed closely by underground mining, co-product/by-product and open-pit categories. In the highest cost category (<USD 260/kgU), underground mining dominates with co-product/by- product, ISL and open-pit mining making significant contributions. The United States does not report IR, leading to under-representation in the ISL alkaline category for the inferred resources.

Table 1.7. Inferred resources by production method

(recoverable resources as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U)

Production method

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

 

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Open-pit mining

 

2 430

 

46 665

 

431 091

 

567 678

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Underground mining

 

16 785

 

110 100

 

567 310

 

925 081

In situ leaching acid

 

320 427

 

498 265

 

630 252

 

727 534

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In situ leaching alkaline

 

4 760

 

8 470

 

9 240

 

9 240

Co-product/by-product

 

0

 

94 580

 

526 475

 

728 360

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unspecified

 

0

 

41 652

 

112 833

 

215 228

Total

 

344 402

 

799 732

 

2 277 201

 

3 173 121

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

27

URANIUM SUPPLY

Distribution of resources by processing method

In 2017, countries were once again requested to report identified resources by cost categories and by the expected processing method, i.e. conventional from open-pit or conventional from underground mining, ISL, in-place leaching, heap leaching from open pit or heap leaching from underground, or unspecified. It should be noted that not all countries reported their resources according to processing method.

The overall distribution has changed very little since the last reporting period. In all cost categories for RAR (see Table 1.8), conventional processing from underground mining is the major contributor, with Australia dominating because of Olympic Dam. In the higher cost categories, conventional processing from open pit and ISL make increasing contributions, but even when combined do not surpass the underground resources. In the IR category (see Table 1.9), ISL dominates in the two lower cost categories, but in the two higher cost categories it is replaced by underground conventional methods with totals more than twice that of ISL in the highest cost category. The amount that is reported as unspecified is important because the exploration of many deposits is insufficiently advanced for any mine planning to have been carried out. Note that the United States does not report IR by processing method, leading to under-representation in the ISL alkaline category in Table 1.9.

Table 1.8. Reasonably assured resources by processing method

(recoverable resources as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U)

Processing method

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conventional from OP

 

16 631

 

72 673

644 494

 

826 357

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conventional from UG

 

320 784

 

617 651

2 202 571

 

2 717 081

In situ leaching acid

 

283 173

 

428 108

524 479

 

586 705

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In situ leaching alkaline

 

20 300

 

27 720

30 100

 

30 100

In-place leaching*

 

-

 

-

516

 

3 669

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heap leaching** from OP

 

1 458

 

24 114

261 911

 

312 923

Heap leaching** from UG

 

-

 

-

18 232

 

20 334

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unspecified

 

71 050

 

109 652

182 600

 

317 710

Total

 

713 396

 

1 279 918

3 864 903

 

4 814 879

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Also known as stope leaching or block leaching.

**A subset of open-pit and underground mining, since it is used in conjunction with them.

Table 1.9. Inferred resources by processing method

(recoverable resources as of 1 January 2017, tonnes U)

Processing method

 

<USD 40/kgU

 

<USD 80/kgU

<USD 130/kgU

 

<USD 260/kgU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conventional from OP

 

2 430

 

28 952

295 374

 

395 182

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conventional from UG

 

16 785

 

171 756

1 004 728

 

1 424 419

In situ leaching acid

 

320 427

 

498 265

630 252

 

727 534

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In situ leaching alkaline

 

4 760

 

8 470

9 240

 

9 240

In-place leaching*

 

-

 

-

2 068

 

15 933

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heap leaching** from OP

 

-

 

19 417

117 331

 

154 022

Heap leaching** from UG

 

-

 

-

6 675

 

14 431

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unspecified

 

-

 

72 872

211 533

 

432 360

Total

 

344 402

 

799 732

2 277 201

 

3 173 121

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Also known as stope leaching or block leaching.

**A subset of open-pit and underground mining, since it is used in conjunction with them.

28

URANIUM 2018: RESOURCES, PRODUCTION AND DEMAND, NEA No. 7413, © OECD 2018

Соседние файлы в папке книги