There has always been a huge stockpile of mined yellow cake making it a buyerâs market, depressing the price. Enough uranium has been mined to supply existing demand for 20 years, I think. Also the demand was always easy to see since it takes time to put a new reactor online, and there were only so many countries that were using nuclear power. Finally, itâs unclear how much uranium the Earth actually has, and unlike the oil industryâs awareness of the Earthâs oil reserves, I donât think anyone has come up with a âpeak uranium.â Having said that, with China and India as new potentially enormous energy consumers and already proposing scores of new reactors; the reality of expensive oil and diminishing oil reserves; the Westâs long-term interest to get off of Muslim oil, and other oil suppliers possessing hostile politics and ideologies; and not to mention how SAFE nuclear energy is today with 4th generation reactors; uranium is becoming a serious alternative. In addition, uranium is probably the only hope for any practical implementation of a âhydrogen economy,â as it can produce the enormous amount of electricity needed to get the hydrogen out of water for economic consumption. That all depends on where the technology will go, of course. For example, there could be a huge leap in battery technology so that direct transfer of electricity to cars is practical. But uranium bulls should be paying close attention to coal. Coal is very abundant, if not the most abundant energy source. Itâs easy to find and everyone knows where it is. America has the largest reserves, with the former Soviet Union territories as a close second, and then China, possessing about half as much. There have been huge strides in âclean coalâ technologies, but I donât know if this includes the removal of the carbon dioxide greenhouse gas. The other issue is whether a clean coal economy is actually cheaper than a nuclear power economy. They both must be physically mined, and the cost of clean coal technology that removes carbon dioxide may eclipse the high expense of building nuclear power plants. Perhaps a combination of a yellow-cake and clean-coal economy is a viable alternative to oil and natural gas, especially for America, which hasnât added a single reactor in the last 20 years. The source of these energies comes from home, and from friendly Western societies. I wouldnât be surprised if government energy policy continues to push for technological developments associated with these energies, including: nuclear power plant technology, nuclear waste technology, clean-coal technology, mining technology, hydrogen technology, electric storage and transfer technologies, and so on. âSo all stocks associated with these technologies may be a good addition to the portfolio. The uranium companies are where the mining is at: Canada and Australia. I think the third largest mining going on resides in one of the â-istanâ countries that used to be part of the former Soviet Union. At least Torontoâs Cameco (CCO) is listed on NYSE as CCJ, and does not trade as thinly like the others. Of course, donât expect any of this to happen if the price of oil returns to the $30-40 level and stays there. Thatâs why the people who believe the oil industry loves high oil prices, are ill informed. High sustained prices, for whatever reason, will kill the industry. So if the price of oil remains at these levels or higher, itâs because the industry is sincerely unable to meet demand and unable to do anything about it.