"What Happened To The Uranium Boom?"

The title of my talk, "What Happened to the Uranium Boom?" is old news. Certainly it is for this group. All of us that make our living in uranium know that the boom of the last half of the 1970's is over. U.S. production has been exceeding consumption by more than two to one. Mines and mills are closing and yellowcake prices have been dropping for over 20 months. The gloomy outlook for the industry in the near term has been well documented by soothsayers of various descriptions, your daily newspapers, and in the Nuexco Monthly Reports. I'd like to attempt to describe the next upturn in the market (speculate, really) based upon the clues we're seeing now. In order to do that, I'd first like to go over briefly, some of the market factors that contributed to the recent price drop and resultant production cutbacks, and then hypothesize on the way these factors are changing and will change. Market prices are greatly affected (maybe even entirely determined) by buyer perceptions. This is particularly true with uranium, because of the long lead times associated with nuclear plant construction and also with conventional mine/mill development. Before the price rise (say, 1975) utility uranium buyers believed that: 1) U.S. producers would have difficulty expanding to meet U.S. demand. 2) Australian and Canadian production was essential to avoid shortages in the early 1980's. 3) Uranlum prices would continue to rise as demand exceeded supply. 4) Enrichment capacity would become inadequate. It was thought necessary, therefore, to build enriched inventory in the early 1980's for use in the late 1980's. Artificially accelerated expansion of the uranium producer industry was necessary to accommodate anticipated enrichment demand. Current perceptions are largely the opposite. These are the beliefs that were held most of this year and late last year as prices dropped. 1) U.S. production is far in excess of domestic need. Contraction of the U.S. production lndustry is necessary. 2) Canadian and Australian supply is optional and not essential. Producers in those countries are expanding mainly by displacing higher cost production and not because they fill a void, 3) Prices may be essentially stable for some time. 4) Enriched uranium is in excess supply. That is 1981. 1982 is shaping up to look like this: 1) Prices will have bottomed out. (That is not Nuexco's opinion necessarily, by the way, but it is my opinion.) 2) There will still be substantial utility inventories, but fewer spot sales. 3) Canadian and perhaps Australian sellers will have made substantial sales in the U.S. and will be aggressively seeking more. 4) U.S. production will have been dramatically curtailed. U.S. utilities that wish to con- tract long term will have difficulty in finding domestic sellers. Concern will develop about the availability of U.S. production capability. Virtually all long term con- tracts signed will be with non-U.S. sellers. 5) An awareness will begin to develop among U.S. buyers that we are approaching a period of dependence upon foreign uranium (which will be true). The history of the uranium market has been one of dramatic changes and overreaction to those changes. The rapid price rise of a few years ago generated excess U.S. production capacity and the rapid price drop of the last two years will almost certainly result in too little capacity. It will soon be difficult for U.S. buyers to buy domestic material except on the spot market. The question is, "will they care?" The lack of demand, of course, is the underlying reason for the current poor health of the uranium industry. In 1972, 1973 and 1974 collectively, there were 105 nuclear reactors ordered in the U.S. That ordering rate was expected to continue and accelerate throughout this century. In 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, and 1980 altogether, there were 56 more reactors cancelled than ordered. The net growth of our only customer since 1974 has been a negative 56. TO put this in perspective, if these 56 reactors were operating now it would more than double present U.S. uranium consumption. Underlying lack of demand is something that is simply not going to change in this decade. Time is going to be required. The NRC indicates that the maximum feasible number of new reactors that can be licensed each year is six. That would increase uranium consumption by only 10% per year. New reactors, if ordered tomorrow, would not generate new uranium demand until after 1990. Even so, United States' consumption of uranium will rise from the 1980 level of 18 million pounds per year, to