with Jonathan Fisher, CEO of Cauldron Energy

Recording date: 29th May 2025

The uranium sector is experiencing a significant transformation as global energy policy shifts create new investment opportunities amid persistent supply-demand imbalances. Recent developments in the United States and Australia are reshaping the investment landscape for uranium, presenting compelling opportunities for long-term investors.

The United States has emerged as a catalyst for renewed global interest in nuclear energy through executive orders aimed at quadrupling nuclear capacity. This dramatic policy shift has accelerated regulatory processes, with projects like Anfield Energy's uranium mine receiving federal approval in under two weeks compared to typical multi-year timelines. With current US uranium consumption of 50 million pounds annually and ambitious expansion goals, the country could require an additional 75 million pounds of supply even with increased domestic production.

These policy changes are creating international momentum, with European nations engaging in more meaningful nuclear energy discussions. However, the uranium market faces significant structural supply constraints that cannot be easily resolved through price increases alone. Industry analysis indicates that even at $100 per pound, insufficient producers exist to extract necessary quantities for 2030 demand targets.

Critical bottlenecks include skilled workforce shortages, as experienced professionals age out of the industry while replacement expertise requires substantial time investment. Regulatory delays compound these challenges, with Australian companies facing years for approvals despite having economically viable projects constrained only by policy restrictions.

Market dynamics favor uranium investors through limited spot market liquidity and continued accumulation by financial entities like Sprott Physical Uranium Trust. Emerging demand from data centers and artificial intelligence applications adds new electricity requirements favoring nuclear baseload power.

While uranium investments carry political and regulatory risks, the fundamental supply-demand imbalance appears increasingly compelling. Australian uranium assets offer particularly attractive economics in favorable regulatory environments, while global supply constraints limit near-term competition. Success requires patience for policy changes to translate into operational results, but the structural nature of supply challenges suggests potentially extended periods of higher price levels for investors willing to navigate these complexities.

Sign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com

Interview with Andreas Bork, VP Investor Relations, Shell

Our Previous Interview: https://www.cruxinvestor.com/posts/balanced-approach-to-energy-transition-highlights-investment-potential-in-oil-gas-sector-6098

Recording date: 27 May 2025

Shell's recent strategic evolution illustrates how major integrated oil companies are positioning themselves for sustained profitability while adapting to changing energy markets. Under leadership that has prioritized commercial discipline over broad energy participation, Shell has identified four core competitive advantages: deep-water oil production with favorable breakeven costs, global LNG leadership in a growing market, extensive downstream customer access, and superior trading capabilities across an increasingly differentiated energy system.

The company has addressed historical capital allocation challenges by implementing differentiated return requirements across business segments, ranging from 10-15% internal rates of return for new projects. This enhanced discipline has enabled aggressive shareholder returns, with Shell executing over $3 billion in quarterly share buybacks for 14 consecutive quarters, reducing share count by 22% and targeting up to 50% total reduction.

Operational improvements include streamlining from over 70 targets to eight key metrics while targeting $5-8 billion in structural cost savings between 2022-2028. The company plans to add over one million barrels daily production capacity through 2030 at an average $35 per barrel breakeven cost, providing resilience against price volatility.

Shell's "more value, less emissions" energy transition strategy emphasizes commercial viability, shifting from direct renewable generation toward intermediary roles in power trading and storage. The company maintains $5 billion in currently loss-making biofuel investments while avoiding additional deployment until market conditions improve.

The integrated business model provides defensive characteristics through downstream and trading operations that operate largely independently of oil price fluctuations. With net debt of approximately $10 billion excluding leases, Shell maintains financial flexibility while leveraging scenario planning processes to navigate multiple potential energy futures.

This strategic transformation demonstrates how traditional oil and gas companies can generate attractive returns through disciplined execution rather than commodity price speculation, creating a compelling investment case for sector exposure.

Learn more: https://www.cruxinvestor.com/companies/shell

Sign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com

Recording date: 23 May 2025

Uranium exploration in Canada's Athabasca Basin follows predictable patterns that investors should understand before committing capital. Analysis of major discoveries reveals that companies typically require 2.5 years and approximately $50 million in investment before announcing formal resource estimates. Modern standards demand around 80 drill holes before qualified persons will sign off on these estimates, significantly higher than the 40-50 holes required for earlier projects.

The geographic location within the basin dramatically impacts project economics. Eastern basin projects benefit from existing infrastructure including roads and power access, while western basin developments face substantial additional costs and permitting delays. Most uranium exploration companies cannot realistically become producers themselves; successful exits typically involve acquisition by established operators like Cameco, Orano, or Denison, requiring deposits of sufficient scale to justify their interest.

Major uranium companies operate with distinctive decision-making processes. Companies like Cameco and Orano allocate $10-20 million annually across multiple exploration projects, treating exploration as portfolio management rather than individual project decisions. They require potential discoveries of 100-150 million pounds to justify significant development investment.

The sector is experiencing a philosophical shift away from pure exploration toward demonstrating clear paths to production. This change reflects both reduced availability of traditional exploration funding and investor demands for shorter timelines to revenue generation.

For investors, key considerations include evaluating management team quality, technical competence, and financial sustainability. Companies making unrealistic promises about timelines should raise red flags, as legitimate development requires substantial time and investment.

While the uranium exploration sector offers potential for substantial returns, success requires understanding the complex realities of resource development and the limited number of viable exit strategies. The trend toward more conservative resource development practices may ultimately benefit the sector by improving project quality and investor confidence.

Sign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com

Recording date: 6th May 2025

As global energy demand shifts toward clean and reliable sources, uranium has re-emerged as a critical commodity. While the macro case for uranium remains strong, investing in early-stage uranium companies—particularly juniors—requires careful evaluation. In a recent conversation, Purepoint Uranium CEO Chris Frostad outlines a pragmatic framework for assessing these companies, emphasizing the need for technical justification, financial discipline, and sound governance.

A key distinction Frostad draws is between projects that are “drill ready” and those that are truly “drill worthy.” The former may be permitted and funded, but without robust technical evidence—such as geophysical anomalies, structural indicators, or alteration signatures—drilling can be speculative. With each drill hole representing a significant expense, companies must clearly articulate why a target justifies the cost. Investors should look beyond proximity to known deposits and focus on geological continuity and data support.

Remote project logistics further compound cost and risk. In regions like Canada’s Athabasca Basin, access is often seasonal and expensive, requiring helicopter transport or winter-based mobilization. Frostad stresses that these constraints demand more rigorous planning and higher thresholds for drilling decisions. Companies without operational flexibility or logistical foresight risk budget overruns and stalled programs.

Capital management is equally critical. Frostad warns against indiscriminate fundraising, especially in weak markets, which can lead to excessive dilution. Instead, he advocates for “surgical” capital raises, guided by project needs and market conditions. Investors should monitor spending patterns, burn rates, and changes in general and administrative (G&A) costs. A drop in ground expenditures combined with rising overhead may signal misaligned priorities.

Valuation remains a complex issue. Frostad notes that share prices often diverge from asset value, partly due to limited liquidity and investor hesitance to sell at a loss. This underscores the importance of evaluating fundamentals rather than market sentiment alone.

Finally, governance and alignment matter. True alignment with shareholders occurs when insiders buy shares with their own capital and maintain prudent compensation structures. Investors should assess insider ownership, use of warrants and options, and the proportion of capital directed to non-core spending.

Ultimately, Frostad’s guidance highlights that successful uranium investment isn’t just about macro trends. It’s about asking hard questions, analyzing capital discipline, and understanding how each drill decision is made. For investors, that level of scrutiny is essential to navigate the sector with confidence.

Sign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com

Recording date: 28th April 2025

Savvy uranium investors must look beyond deposit grades to identify companies with long-term potential, according to industry veteran Chris Frostad. While high-grade deposits remain attractive, several other critical variables significantly influence project success.

Jurisdictional factors present surprising challenges even in presumed safe regions. Canada ranks as the third slowest globally for permitting processes, requiring an average of 27 years, while the US follows closely at 29 years. This reality creates a complex investment landscape where tier-one jurisdictions offer security but often with extended development timelines. Investors should assess specific regions rather than countries, as mining friendliness varies dramatically between provinces and states.

Management experience proves crucial, particularly in technical roles. Exploration companies with geologists who have extensive regional knowledge demonstrate significantly higher success rates in identifying promising deposits. Many junior explorers face challenges balancing technical expertise with business acumen, with some adopting "incubator" models where resources are shared across multiple companies.

Joint ventures and strategic partnerships offer sustainable exploration models with reduced dilution risk. These arrangements provide multiple advantages: management fees covering overhead costs, shared exploration expenses, continued operations during market downturns, and decreased need for dilutive financings. Value creation for explorers comes primarily at the discovery and resource definition stage, often achievable with substantially less dilution through these partnerships.

Indigenous relationships represent a fundamental aspect of uranium development. While ESG factors have gained recent prominence, these considerations have always been essential to successful mining operations. First Nations communities in uranium-rich regions like Saskatchewan have become increasingly organized, now often working collectively when engaging with resource companies, creating more streamlined and predictable development environments.

Market conditions show positive momentum, with significant uranium sales volumes from Saskatchewan in 2024. Demand appears robust, particularly from the US market, benefiting Canadian producers. However, resource nationalism trends in uranium-producing African nations highlight the importance of monitoring potential geopolitical shifts affecting long-term asset values.

Investors should thoroughly examine corporate expenses, watching for red flags like excessive overhead or elaborate fee structures that divert capital from exploration activities. By considering these multifaceted factors beyond simple grade metrics, investors can better identify uranium companies positioned to succeed in bringing new supply to a market increasingly demanding clean, reliable energy sources.

Sign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com

The Energy Show, with Brandon Munro, Executive Chairman of Bannerman Energy

Recording date: 28th April 2025

The Uranium Investment Case: Critical Supply Constraints Meet Growing Clean Energy Demand
The uranium market is presenting investors with a compelling opportunity driven by one of the most favorable supply-demand imbalances in the commodity space. After enduring a decade-long bear market following the Fukushima disaster in 2011, uranium has entered a structural bull market characterized by significant supply constraints meeting accelerating demand.

As Brandon Munro, Executive Chairman of Bannerman Energy, explains, "What we've had for a decade is uranium prices that were below the marginal cost of production. That's completely unsustainable in any commodity, but particularly in uranium where lead times are so long and capital intensity is so high." This pricing environment has created a severe underinvestment cycle, with few new projects advancing toward production despite growing demand forecasts.

The supply deficit is structural rather than cyclical. Current global production meets only 75-80% of annual reactor requirements, with the gap historically filled by secondary supplies that are now diminishing. Even with uranium prices having risen from $48 to approximately $100 per pound in 2023, the industry faces significant challenges in bringing new supply online. The technical complexity, regulatory hurdles, and capital requirements of uranium mining create lead times of 7-10 years for new production, meaning the current deficit cannot be quickly resolved.

On the demand side, nuclear energy has experienced a remarkable transformation in public and policy perception. Once controversial in climate discussions, nuclear power is now widely recognized as essential to meeting decarbonization goals while providing reliable baseload electricity. China continues its aggressive nuclear expansion with plans to more than double capacity by 2035. The United States, Europe, and emerging economies are extending the lives of existing reactors while supporting new builds through favorable policy frameworks.

Geopolitical considerations further strengthen the investment case. With approximately 40% of global uranium production coming from Kazakhstan and significant conversion and enrichment capacity controlled by Russia, Western utilities are increasingly focused on supply security. This creates premium opportunities for projects in politically stable jurisdictions like Australia, Canada, and Namibia, where Bannerman's Etango project is located.

For investors evaluating uranium opportunities, management quality emerges as perhaps the most critical differentiator. "In uranium, the winners are those with experienced management teams that have been through the cycle before," notes Munro. The technical complexities and specialized knowledge required in uranium mining mean that teams with proven track records of bringing projects to production should command premium valuations.

The market structure also offers investors potential for sustained price appreciation. Unlike many commodities with transparent pricing and liquid futures markets, uranium trades primarily through bilateral contracts negotiated directly between producers and utilities. This structure, combined with utilities' risk aversion regarding fuel security, creates conditions for prices to potentially overshoot equilibrium levels during periods of perceived scarcity.

While challenges certainly exist, including execution risks in bringing projects to production, the fundamental drivers for uranium appear more robust than in previous cycles. With reactor construction accelerating globally, supply constraints likely to persist through the decade, and nuclear energy's role in the clean energy transition now firmly established, uranium presents a rare opportunity to invest in a commodity with both near-term catalysts and long-term structural support.

—

Learn more: https://cruxinvestor.com/categories/commodities/uranium

https://cruxinvestor.com/companies/bannerman-energy

Sign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com

Recording date: 17th April 2025

The global uranium market is at a pivotal juncture, experiencing a standoff between utilities and producers. While term prices hold steady at around $80/lb, spot prices have weakened to $65/lb, with financial traders dominating over 90% of spot market transactions.

Industry experts at the recent World Nuclear Fuel Cycle Conference in Montreal raised alarms about a looming supply gap. The uranium fuel cycle must scale to match ambitious nuclear growth targets, but current and planned projects appear insufficient to meet projected demand by 2030.

U.S. utilities, representing the world's largest uranium market, are hesitant to commit to long-term contracts due to multiple uncertainties. These include potential tariffs, a new Section 232 investigation on critical minerals (including uranium), and geopolitical concerns regarding Russian and Kazakh supply. While utilities generally have supply coverage through 2028-2029, their uncovered requirements increase dramatically thereafter.

The uranium industry is transitioning from restart projects to new greenfield developments. These new projects require sustained higher prices to be economically viable, with recent restart projects experiencing cost overruns of approximately 45% above initial projections.

Global production dynamics add further complexity. U.S. domestic production sits at just 1-2 million pounds annually against demand of roughly 50 million pounds. Kazakhstan, the world's largest producer, is increasingly orienting sales toward China and Russia, potentially reducing Western market access.

Conversion capacity represents another critical bottleneck. The only significant new project on the horizon is the potential restart of the UK's Springfields facility, which wouldn't be operational until 2030-31 even with immediate investment decisions.

Unlike uranium mining, the enrichment segment has seen substantial price increases, with SWU prices rising from $60-65 to $130-150. Utilities have been willing to sign contracts at these higher prices, recognizing limited alternatives.

For investors, these dynamics present both opportunities and risks. Multiple catalysts could drive prices higher, including inevitable utility procurement cycles, continued production shortfalls, and geopolitical developments limiting supply access. Industry expert Jonathan Hinze of UX Consulting warns that the "uranium industry is not yet prepared to handle the growing supply gap projected to emerge by 2030."

As uranium veteran Dustin Garrow summarizes from his five decades of experience, "the fundamentals are better now than I've ever seen them in 50 years," suggesting a potentially favorable outlook for investors with appropriate risk tolerance and time horizons.

Sign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com

With John Ciampaglia, CEO of Sprott Asset Management

Recording date: 16th April 2025

Strategic Metals in Uncertain Markets: Gold, Silver, and Uranium Outlook
In a recent interview, Sprott Asset Management CEO John Ciampaglia shared insights on three strategic metals - gold, silver, and uranium - highlighting their investment potential in today's volatile economic environment.

Gold has experienced a remarkable surge in 2024, starting around $2,000 per ounce and recently hitting $3,300, establishing new all-time highs. Ciampaglia attributes this to gold's fundamental role as an "alternative asset" and "monetary metal" rather than a commodity. The current global landscape of trade wars, tariffs, and geopolitical tensions has introduced unprecedented uncertainty into markets, making risk pricing difficult across traditional asset classes.

Three major buying groups are driving gold demand: central banks (significant purchasers since 2023), Western investors (returning after a five-year absence), and Chinese retail investors (flocking to gold ETFs amid currency devaluation concerns). Historically, gold has returned about 8% annually over decades while serving as a portfolio stabilizer during turbulent times.

Silver occupies a unique position as both a precious and industrial metal. While gold has surged, silver has lagged but presents compelling value. Trading around $35 per ounce, silver remains well below its 2011 high of approximately $50. The gold-to-silver ratio stands at around 90:1, a historically high level suggesting silver may be undervalued relative to gold. Approximately 50% of silver demand comes from industrial applications, including electronics, medical devices, and solar panels (consuming about 20% of global supply).

Unlike gold, most silver production comes as a byproduct of other mining operations, creating less predictable supply conditions. Ciampaglia indicates current data suggests silver is in a supply deficit, with silver typically following gold's price movements with a lag.

Uranium presents perhaps the most complex investment case, having experienced significant price volatility despite strong long-term fundamentals. The uranium market has recently corrected, with prices falling from approximately $100 per pound to around $64-65 per pound due to political uncertainty, regulatory reviews, and tariff concerns.

Despite these headwinds, a growing supply-demand imbalance is projected between 2028 and 2035. Uranium demand features unique inelasticity - nuclear power plants require uranium fuel regardless of price or economic conditions. A significant recent development has been the entrance of technology "hyperscalers" like Google, Meta, and Microsoft into the nuclear power space for their electricity-intensive AI data centers.

For investors, Sprott offers physical metal trusts and ETFs across all three metals. Ciampaglia emphasizes viewing these metals as strategic rather than tactical allocations: "We view it as the ballast in your portfolio, helps you sleep at night, and helps to offset some of the risks that we're obviously seeing right now with extreme volatility."

As global economic uncertainties persist and supply-demand fundamentals evolve, gold, silver, and uranium each present distinct investment cases with varying risk-reward profiles, potentially offering both portfolio protection and growth opportunities in today's challenging market environment.

Learn more: https://cruxinvestor.com

Sign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com