Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Uranium, a Raging Bull

Jump to new
Scrapping nuclear weapons is expensive sure, but that is the only thing saving the nuclear reactor business. Without decommissioning nukes there would be a huge uranium shortage, and there will be soon, as the number of retired nukes dwindles. Whatever the Greenie's sentiments, when uranium prices go through the roof, with Australia host to half the worlds known uranium resources, we will have mining. Labour for all its posturing in the past will see the huge employment and economic benefits for Australia, and be forced by circumstance to change it's policies, at both state and federal levels.

Here in Australia I personally would like to see solar, wind, and tide power used before nuclear, and this may be possible, with our small population, living, in the majority close to the coast. However I don't see this as possible for already established nuclear "power" states such as France and for the developing countries of China and India.

Global warming along with hydrocarbon fuel shortages will in the end dictate the need for nuclear power on a global scale .... so I feel that uranium plays will pay off.

Of course this is not a short term, day traders, outlook ... but for long term investment ... the sky is the limit ... I personally will keep uranium miners and exploration co.s on my watchlists.


Cheers ... Dave

-------------------
just an opinion folks
 
Physicist talks up uranium potential
Friday August 18, 2006, 10:21 am

A British physicist says Australia is well-positioned to supply nuclear energy to the rest of the world.

Brian Cox, from the University of Manchester, will be delivering a talk in Alice Springs tonight as part of National Science Week.

He says it would be environmentally unsustainable to power China and India's rapidly expanding demand for energy with coal.

Dr Cox says nuclear power is a clean and safe alternative.

"Maybe Australia has got the resources, in terms of coal and gas, to generate electricity without nuclear power," he said.

"But the uranium, and thorium actually, which is a thing that people don't hear about a lot but it's better than uranium for nuclear power stations, and Australia's got about half of that as well.

"So Australia's incredibly rich in the natural resources everybody's is going to need in the next 50 years."
 
Couldn't agree more Kennas. Had my eye on thorium for a while to see what kind of developments happen. From what i've read it stays radioactive for significantly less time then uranium. It more suitable as a nuclear fuel and harder to make nuclear weapons from. Produces less waste and is more abundant in the earths crust.

Don't know how far away the technology is but i have a feeling that it will eventually overtake uranium as the prefered nuclear fuel source.
 
At the rate the nuclear fuel industry is expanding and the likelyhood limits will be placed on greenhouse energy such as coal i think we will begin to see its development as a serious fuel within the next 5 years. Maybe sooner if oil prices continue to rise.

From memory india is in the process of building reactors to use thorium.
 
Perhaps we need to start a new thead on Thorium and id the miners digging the stuff up. Or, is it always collocated with uranium? Very interesting....
 
No MS look at the charts its gone up up and up, those closest its been to a correction is being "flat" !

Agree YT im calling $60 by years end... :D
 
Has to correct at some stage doesn't it? Or, because it's been a slow steady rise, perhaps it's ok? Straight up rises worry me.
 
kennas said:
Has to correct at some stage doesn't it? Or, because it's been a slow steady rise, perhaps it's ok? Straight up rises worry me.
Click to expand...

I think somewhere btw 2008-2010 it will correct
Several mines from Kazakhstan will be producing; along with LH, Malawi and Olympid Dam expansions will kick in by then as well...
 
Its not going to correct any time soon. Supply is falling as soviet missile stocks dwindle and demand still growning with 20+ more powerplants being built worldwide.

billhill
 
This article is a bit long so will break into 2 parts

September 20, 2006
By James Finch, jfinch@...


Russians Expecting $100/Pound Uranium

Sprott Market Strategist Believes New Reactor Inventory Could Take
Price Higher


On Tuesday, September 19th UxC announced a new highest ever spot
uranium price.

In a speech at the 50th annual regular session of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) General Conference in Vienna, IAEA chief
Mohammed Elbaradei confirmed what many of us knew in praising China
and Russia, which "currently have the most ambitious plans for short-
term nuclear expansion." Nine months ago, he might not have made
that statement.

Today, Russia has emerged as one of the more vocal proponents for,
and aggressive strategists in, the full spectrum of the nuclear fuel
cycle. From nuclear waste disposal to uranium mining and enrichment,
and in moving forward to construct nuclear reactors, Russia could
possibly become an even more significant future player in the
nuclear sector than China is envisioned. Russia's civilian nuclear
chief Sergei Kiriyenko told Russian television earlier this
week, "Russia believes 25 percent of the world's market in nuclear
fuel-cycle services, including uranium enrichment, is an optimal
share. Technically and technologically, we are well positioned for
this."

And whoever control this much market share should help decide the
price. "The Russian people I've spoken with seem to think $100/pound
is a given," Sprott Asset Management Market Strategist Kevin
Bambrough told us upon his return from the recent World Nuclear
Association Conference in London. "If anyone is in the know, or can
affect market psychology, it would be them."

Last week, Tenex's general director Vladimir Smirnov announced the
formation of a new national uranium exploration and mining company,
provisionally named "The Uranium Mining Company." He said it will be
established by the end of this year, and hopes to boost production
by tenfold over the next two years.

This week, Kiriyenko announced Russia's "international" center to
enrich uranium should be built by the end of this year, and ready to
launch by early 2007. As announced earlier, the site will be in
eastern Siberia at the Angarsk Electrolysis Chemical Plant. The city
is located 3,000 miles east of Moscow. Russian President Putin
suggested at the current IAEA conference that the international
community set up enrichment centers under the supervision of the
IAEA to prevent discrimination in access to nuclear energy. Putin's
veiled remarks were likely aimed at encouraging Iran's civilian
nuclear energy program, for which Russia is rebuilding the Bushehr
nuclear power plant. Russia also proposes to joint venture another
uranium enrichment center in Kazakhstan with that country.

In early September, Sergei Obozov, head of Rosenergoatom, Russia's
nuclear power monopoly, announced plans to start building nine
nuclear reactors in 2007. But, it won't stop there. According to an
estimate calculated in September by the World Nuclear Association,
Russia has 26 reactors proposed or planned by 2020. The country
hopes to power 23 percent of its electricity with nuclear energy.
This would give Russia nearly 60 reactors, almost as many as France
and Japan presently have operational.

Russia is also revamping its nuclear industry, consolidating its
civilian nuclear companies into one state-run company. It will be
called Atomprom, and the country hopes to compete with other
industry giants, such as AREVA, General Electric and Toshiba to
build reactors.

This is where the business might get even more interesting. "Pairing
of new reactors with uranium contracts could be huge," Bambrough
explained. "Companies wanting to build reactors are going around the
world, wanting to joint ventures with mining companies to increase
uranium supply for themselves. The reason they want to do that is to
offer a full suite of services. They know they can not sell a
reactor without supply." Based upon how Russia's nuclear ambitions
are unfolding, this is their likely course of action. AREVA, which
sells reactors, has mining operations in Canada, Africa and
elsewhere.

Major Flaw in Uranium Requirement Calculations

In his research Bambrough observed a significant flaw in uranium
price modeling. "No one is modeling for `new reactors' inventory,"
he pointed out to us. According to the World Nuclear Association's
(WNA) most recent report, another 222 nuclear reactors are planned
or proposed by more than 20 countries worldwide. And each month
those estimates grow larger. At the time of the WNA report, the
United States was marked for 23 proposed/planned. This week, that
number grew to 30. To remain conservative, we agreed to use a base
figure of 160 new reactors before 2020.

"When you start looking at the demand that comes from these new
reactors, from what is called the `initial core,' the numbers some
people are using is anywhere between 1.5 to 1.8 million pounds,"
Bambrough explained. "That is how much is required on the day you
commission it. It's prudent to purchase that uranium about four
years prior to commissioning your reactor." Prudent nuclear plant
operators would prefer to have three to five years of uranium
inventory in advance. "That's two million pounds per reactor,"
Bambrough calculated.

"Spread that number out over a decade, and that means 32 million
pounds per year," he said. "If you can imagine, even just one
million pounds per all of the 600 (total) reactors, it could be
possible there may be 600 million pounds just for inventories
between now and 2020."

What will that do to the spot uranium price? "I am hearing about
deals being done in the $60s," Bambrough announced. "I still think
we are going to challenge the inflation-adjusted highs (for spot
uranium), somewhere between $110 to $120/pound, and I think it's
going to test that looking out a couple of years." Because of the
how the energy market has been changing, Bambrough added, "The
fundamentals are going to be more compelling than in the 1970s."

And it is a compelling time for analysts who have been re-thinking
their pricing of yellowcake. In early September UBS raised its
estimates on spot uranium to $70/pound. Many industry insiders told
us uranium would not eclipse $50/pound this year. TradeTech's Gene
Clark forecast $55/pound earlier this year; Ux Consulting's Jeff
Combs thought it might go higher before year end. "There's more and
more talk that $75 and $80/pound are in the offing shortly,"
Bambrough told us.

The combination of "new reactor build" and the pairing of uranium
contracts with new reactor sales is not a new one. This helped cause
the uranium price rise in the 1970s in the United States.
Westinghouse, the world's leading reactor manufacturer, got into the
uranium mining business in the 1970s through a consortium called
Wyoming Minerals and began producing uranium through the in situ
recovery (ISR) method. Previously, another reactor manufacturer,
General Electric, had merged with Utah International to spin off
Pathfinder Minerals. Its uranium mining subsidiary filled its
requirements.

By dangling uranium contracts as an incentive to purchase a reactor,
a reactor manufacturer might overlook existing utilities in need of
uranium. "It would be foolish for them to go existing utilities and
say, `we'd like to sell you four million pounds of uranium and give
you a long-term contract,'" said Bambrough. "Why would they want to
make just a couple hundreds of millions of dollars, when they can
sell the same uranium for the same price to someone, who wants to
build a new reactor, and then pack another two billion dollars on
the order? That puts the existing U.S. utilities behind the eight-
ball, those who aren't stepping up and buying orders."
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

tech/a
Uranium problems - supply and disposal
Replies
4
Views
5K
laurie
L
Top