Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Uranium: follow-up


Published on

The meltdown in uranium share is overdone and should offer opportunities to enter the market at prices back to Q3/Q4 2010, before the recent ramp up.

Published in: Economy & Finance
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Uranium: follow-up

  1. 1. Uranium: follow-upUranium shares were hammered Monday and Tuesday following the nuclear crisis inJapan and its consequences in the world for the nuclear electricity generation as a whole.This is chilling people (therefore politicians in the West) and, as for the Three Mills Islandand Tchernobyl accidents, the anti-nuclear lobby is becoming more voiceful and mediastart to listen. • In India, the Minister (whoever he his) in charge of the nuclear industry said that the design of nuclear plants will need to be reviewed (Areva is building 2 there). • In France, ecologist are calling for a referendum within the next 2 years and undoubtedly they will use this for the local elections next week et the following • Gemany’s Merkel called for a 3 months moratorium on expanding the life of old nuclear plants.Let’s pause and reflect. Beyond the weak links (Germany, Switzerland, probably someother Northern European countries and the Obama’s Administration), the leadingnuclear countries reaffirmed their commitment to the nuclear industry(France, fast growing economies) – have they any sensible choice anyway. I even do notsee Japan renouncing to the nuclear electricity. After all the Fukushima nuclear powerstation sustained the earth quake perfectly; it is the tsunami’s wave’s height that washigher than the plant was designed for and caused damages to the cooling system. Inaddition, from what I read (intox or reality?), the Fukushima reactors are from an old GEdesign (1960s…) much less robust than recent designs. As reported by the NYT:“But the type of containment vessel and pressure suppression system used in the failingreactors at Japans Fukushima Daiichi plant is physically less robust, and it has long beenthought to be more susceptible to failure in an emergency than competing designs.”The question I am asking myself is: what could replace nuclear energy in the 20coming years to meet demand? I do not see any but (1) increasing the consumption offossil fuel (coal and natural gas in particular - green energies will only represent a fractiona requirements), (2) a technological breakthrough or (3) a substantial reduction indemand. 1
  2. 2., (1) is the most likely alternative if the nuclear industry growth was to be phaseddown, which I do not expect but if the Japanese problems turn out to be a nuclear disaster;even so, I doubt China and other fast growing economies will stop theirprograms beyond rhetoric toward the population to alleviate their fears. In the West, itmay be different in some countries, but I do not see the main nuclear ones to shift awayfrom this source of energy (France not being the least).If one believes my "optimistic" (realistic) view of the nuclear industry, the coming daysmay provide great opportunities to buy good uranium mining companies aswell as others involved in the nuclear chain.In any case, contracts are long term by nature and due to the time horizon from the start ofbuilding a plant to its completion, the collapse of uranium share prices (up to 50%in 48h for most junior and intermediate miners), including Cameco (-24% at its lowestTuesday compared to Friday’s closing), the leading one, is unjustified in my opinionwhen compared to fundamentals.Disclosure: This was written to my Partners at P&C on Monday and updated/completedWednesday at Australia’s closing.Source:The New York Times: Experts Had Long Criticized Potential Weakness in Design ofStricken Reactor 2