David Talbot: This Time, Uranium Demand Is for Real
Source: George Mack of The Energy Report 01/25/2011
January 27th, 2011
Mining Analyst David Talbot of Toronto, Ontario-based Dundee Securities, sees demand for uranium rising far into the future. He points to the extraordinary buildout of infrastructure in India, Russia and especially China, where the number of reactors currently under construction could triple the number already in use, and where growth could increase 14- to 15-fold a decade from now. Dave shares his extensive knowledge and field experience with The Energy Report and leaves readers with a few interesting ideas that present tremendous potential for growth.
The Energy Report: Your list of buy ratings wouldn't be this broad if you weren't still bullish on the spot price of uranium. Are you bullish? If so, what factors are causing you to be?
David Talbot: Yes, I am bullish on the spot price of uranium. I think it's all about demand this time. I believe that in the past, investors were essentially focused on supply disruptions as the driver for uranium prices. This time around, I think the demand fundamentals are strong and people are paying attention to that. If you take a look at the trendlines of the number of reactors that are in operation and that are being planned, built and proposed, this continues to rise month after month without exception. If you look at China, India and Russia alone, these three countries account for about 50% of the reactor build. China currently has 13 reactors in operation, which is about 2% of their electrical production capacity. But it has 27 reactors that are under construction, 50 in the planning stages, and it has plans to grow that number to about 188 reactors by 2020, which would represent about 7% of its electrical production capacity. This could essentially increase the country's uranium use from its current annual 8 million pounds (Mlb.) to about 45–50 Mlb., which is roughly equal to what the U.S. uses today.
But the story doesn't really stop there. Russia's goal appears to be nuclear power domination, and the country is essentially signing high-level trade agreements with foreign governments. Russia also went after Uranium One Inc. (TSX:UUU). Also, countries like Japan and Korea are building out their nuclear power efforts. So, we believe this access to supply is going to become a real concern for many and that uranium prices are likely to continue to rise. I'm assuming $65/lb. U308 price for 2011, $70/lb. next year, $75/lb. for 2013, $67/lb. in 2014 and $65/lb. thereafter.
TER: Uranium bounced along a $40/lb. baseline for a long time, and during this last six months we've seen an amazing increase in price. Have you seen such a spike before?
DT: I would have to say that the increase in 2006–2007 was probably a larger spike. At that time, the uranium price essentially jumped from $40 to $136 within a year's time. Then, everybody was looking at the spot price. Well, in 2007 spot trading was only about 20 Mlb., or only 8% of the total volume of uranium trades. This time around I think it's a little different. The spot market is much, much bigger—about 50 million pounds, which represents about one-third of the entire market.
TER: Do you believe this is a more sustainable rise than we've seen in the past?
DT: Absolutely. I think it's more sustainable. Last time around, a lot of that speculation also hinged on some of the supply side disruptions—namely Cigar Lake and Ranger. So, this time, not only is there a larger, more robust spot market, it's really the demand that's driving price increases—not supply disruptions.
TER: How does the economy affect the uranium industry? We're in recovery now, but what would happen if we had a double dip?
DT: First of all, the nuclear renaissance really didn't take a break during the credit crisis of 2008 or the economic weakness since. As mentioned before, the trendline showing the number of reactors in operation, and being built, planned and proposed continues to rise month after month without exception. Utilities are notorious for their long-term outlook and, ultimately, another recession probably wouldn't impede their outlook or their uranium requirements.
TER: Do you believe some companies in your coverage universe are more sensitive to economic conditions? And what would those be?
DT: Yes, with an expanding economy I think generalist demand for equities would likely pick up. They often look for new areas to invest their money. We saw this inflow of new money move into the sector quite significantly last November after 52 million pounds worth of the China-AREVA (PAR:CEI) long-term contracts were announced. Generalist investors often manage larger funds and have greater volumes of cash to place; out of necessity, they're drawn to the large-cap, more liquid names like Uranium Participation Corp. (TSX:U), Cameco Corp. (TSX:CCO; NYSE:CCJ), Paladin Energy Ltd. (TSX:PDN; ASX:PDN) or Uranium One. So, I would say the large-cap stories would be the first ones that would benefit. But typically we all see that trickle-down effect—the smaller stocks, the developers, the explorers also tend to benefit.
TER: What if we were in an economic decline? What companies might suffer from that?
DT: In a declining market, I think the smaller, illiquid names would tend to decline a little more. A lot of those companies are dependent on equity financings to sustain their exploration programs or development programs.
TER: Please compare investment opportunities within the developers versus the explorers.
DT: Developers typically have a certain level of drilling, probably a resource and perhaps at least a scoping-study level report on the project. There may be some visibility as far as the ultimate size of the project the company might be working with, and quite often management teams are bolstered with experience and depth. This provides a certain level of comfort for investors, and they may be willing to give up some stock performance for a lower level of risk or assurance of future cash flow, you know, the necessity that a mine will be built. But with the exploration stocks, some of these variables aren't so clear.
TER: Why don't you put target prices on exploration stocks?
DT: I think what it comes down to is that you don't actually have a resource estimate. You definitely don't have a scoping-study level report on the project and, ultimately, you don't know how big that project is going to be. So, for instance, if you were to value one of those early stage projects by throwing an arbitrary target price on it, it may not do justice to the company. I think you really need to wait until you get a bit more information and data before you can start actually running a proper discounted cash flow (DCF) model or even a simple pounds-in-the-ground model.
TER: China has announced that it has the capability to reprocess spent fuel. How does this bode for uranium demand and price?
Source: George Mack of The Energy Report 01/25/2011
January 27th, 2011
The Energy Report - http://www.theenergyreport.com - a
unique, free site, featuring summaries of articles from major publications,
specific recommendations from newsletter writers, analysts and portfolio
managers covering the fossil, nuclear, renewable, and alternative energy
sectors. We welcome your comments mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
The Energy Report is Copyright © 2011 by
Streetwise Inc. All rights are reserved. Streetwise Inc. hereby grants an
unrestricted license to use or disseminate this copyrighted material only
in whole (and always including this disclaimer), but never in part. The Energy
Report does not render investment advice and does not endorse or recommend the
business, products, services or securities of any company mentioned in this
report. From time to time, Streetwise Inc. directors, officers, employees or
members of their families may have a long or short position in securities
mentioned and may make purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open
market or otherwise. Streetwise Inc. does not guarantee the accuracy or
thoroughness of the information reported.
1) George Mack of The Energy Report conducted this interview. He personally and/or his family own shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.
2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of The Energy Report: Ur-Energy, Uranerz, Fission and CanAlaska.
3) David Talbot: I personally and/or my family own shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: CanAlaska Uranium Ltd. I personally and/or my family am paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.
4) David Talbot beneficially owns, has a financial interest in, or exercises investment discretion or control over the following companies mentioned in this interview: CanAlaska Uranium Ltd. David Talbot has visited certain material operations of the following issuer(s): Uranium One Inc., Rockgate Capital Corp., Paladin Energy Ltd., Hathor Exploration Ltd., UEX Corp., Ur-Energy Inc., Uranerz Energy Corp. and Fission Energy Corp. David Talbot and/or Dundee Securities Corporation has been partially reimbursed for expenses by the following issuer(s) for travel to material operations of the issuer(s): Uranium One Inc., Rockgate Capital Corp., Paladin Energy Ltd., Hathor Exploration Ltd., UEX Corp., Ur-Energy Inc., Uranerz Energy Corp. and Fission Energy Corp. Dundee Securities Corporation has provided investment banking services to Rockgate Capital Corp., Hathor Exploration Ltd., UEX Corp. and Fission Energy Corp. in the past 12 months. Dundee Securities Corporation and/or its affiliates, in the aggregate, own and/or exercise control and direction over greater than 10% of a class of equity securities issued by Rockgate Capital Corp. Dundee Securities Corporation and its affiliates, in the aggregate, beneficially own 1% or more of a class of equity securities issued by CanAlaska Uranium Ltd. Garth MacRae, a director of DundeeWealth Inc. and Dundee Corp. and member of the Board of Governors of Goodman & Company, Investment Counsel Ltd., is a director of Uranium Participation Corp.