Cropped Yellow Logo.png

The Mad King

WEBSITE

CONTENT

ACCOUNT

Call Me Elemental

Published on October 12, 2023

“And lord, we’re especially thankful for nuclear power, the cleanest, safest energy source there is. Except for solar, which is just a pipe dream.” Homer Simpson

“If we’re going to tackle global warming, nuclear is the only way you can create massive amounts of power.” Sting

<——————————————->

A Few Words from the King

Volatility has returned, putting markets on edge as anticipated. The fourth quarter hinted at being tumultuous, and so far it’s living up to expectations.

This week I delve into a topic that has been under the spotlight this year — nuclear energy.

Recall my recent article “Houston, we have a problem!” where I mentioned occasionally spotting clear market setups. Uranium once stood out in this regard — a prediction I got wrong, and the sting lingers. Hence, I tread lightly around this subject. Admittedly, the complexities of this topic, layered with nuances, are formidable.

As I was contentedly observing from the sidelines and concentrating on the myriad market evolutions in play now, a conversation with a subscriber nudged me to reevaluate uranium.

The rapid rise in uranium prices in September has magnetised the fear-of-missing-out (FOMO) crowd. I’d hate to be perceived as merely jumping on the bandwagon – that’s far from the truth.

My piqued curiosity led me back to the Uranium Insiders, some amazing people I’d engaged with before.

After an hour-long discussion that could’ve easily extended to three, I found myself engrossed. There’s something invigorating about navigating unfamiliar waters.

The very subscriber who steered me toward uranium has also generously provided invaluable insights on the subject, which I’m excited to relay to you.

Today, I weave together macroeconomics, human psychology, and clean energy — a blend that I promise will be an engaging and insightful read.

In “Smoke & Mirrors“, I said I would cover nuclear at some point; the time has come.

Sincerely Yours,
The King

P.S. Please share your thoughts and reviews about The Mad King, as we’d love to feature them on our new website. Reach out to cleo@themadking.com.

<——————————————->

The King’s Summary

Nuclear energy has often been undervalued due to misconceptions surrounding it.

Mention the word nuclear, and the images that typically surface are those of the haunting mushroom cloud from the Hiroshima bombing, followed by memories of the Chernobyl and Fukushima catastrophes.

But it’s worth noting that Hiroshima occurred 78 years ago and Chernobyl 37 years ago. This suggests that public perception might be anchored in past events, and it’s perhaps time for a fresh perspective.

Fukushima’s crisis resulted from a devastating tsunami, not a primary failure of the nuclear facility itself.

While solar and wind energy have been hailed as the ideal green energy sources for decades, their development hasn’t fully met expectations, primarily due to their intermittent nature.

Germany’s experience serves as a case in point. Once celebrated for its ambitious renewable energy targets, the country now finds itself ramping up coal energy to meet demands — a far cry from its initial clean energy goals.

This isn’t to discredit solar and wind. However, until we devise effective energy storage solutions, it’s unlikely they will supplant fossil fuels.

Given the escalating energy needs in Asia and Africa, nuclear power is emerging as a credible solution. It’s also a surprisingly safe one.

The narrative is straightforward: Demand for nuclear energy is soaring, supply remains limited, there’s a renewed commitment to nuclear power plants, and the sector is attracting fresh interest from speculators and investors.

The next five years will be transformative for the nuclear sector, and it will finally have a chance to prove it is the energy of the future.

The word nuclear might still evoke fear due to historical events, but rebranding it could shift perceptions.

As Josh Wolfe suggested, let’s embrace the term elemental energy. 

<——————————————->

In the sprawling metropolis of Emergia, the skyline was continuously evolving. Skyscrapers reached for the heavens as the hum and boom of construction echoed day and night.

This city was rapidly expanding, a towering symbol of its nation’s booming economy and growth.

Yet, as Emergia grew, so did its energy needs.

On the other side of the globe lay Greenhaven, a city that had long ago finished its outward expansion and was now looking inward. Greenhaven was the epitome of the Western world’s quest for sustainable living. Solar panels gleamed on every rooftop, wind turbines dotted the horizon, and electric vehicles hummed down its leafy lanes.

Emergia’s need for energy was palpable. The city’s leaders grappled with the challenge of fueling its growth without suffocating under the weight of pollution. Coal and gas were abundant, but the environmental cost was high, and the public outcry for cleaner air grew louder by the day.

Meanwhile, in Greenhaven, the situation was different.

They had the infrastructure for renewable energy but struggled with the unpredictability of these sources. A cloudy week or a still day meant energy shortfalls, and Greenhaven had its own energy demand to meet.

It was during a global energy summit that leaders from both cities met.

The conversation inevitably turned to nuclear energy. Dr. Maya Lin, a nuclear physicist from Emergia, passionately spoke about the benefits of nuclear power and the technological advances that had made it safe. 

“Uranium,” she said, “offers a solution for both our cities. For Emergia, it’s a chance to meet our escalating energy demands without the heavy carbon footprint. For Greenhaven, it provides a consistent and reliable energy source to complement renewables.”

John Greenway from Greenhaven, an environmental policy advisor, found himself nodding. “As our cities grow and change,” he reflected, “we need energy solutions that are powerful and sustainable as well as clean and safe. Nuclear, with its low emissions and high output, could be the bridge that connects our two worlds.

The dialogue began a partnership. Greenhaven shared its expertise in energy storage and grid optimisation, and Emergia its advances in safe nuclear technology. 

Despite their differences, both cities saw the promise of uranium as a clean energy source.

Fast forward a decade, and the partnership bore fruit. Emergia’s skyline, though still expanding, now stood under clearer skies.

Greenhaven’s energy grid, bolstered by nuclear power, faced no shortfalls, ensuring that its commitment to a green future was unwavering.

Of course, the tale I’ve woven is a fiction, yet it resonates with the real-world scenarios we face. Though imaginative, the narrative mirrors the energy conundrums of our time. Nuclear stands out as a potentially optimal solution for clean energy. It’s time for society to surmount long-held apprehensions and embrace that potential, scaling it responsibly and confidently.

 

<——————————————->

 

The Fear

Since its inception, nuclear energy has been shrouded in a mix of awe and apprehension. The very word nuclear often evokes vivid images of mushroom clouds and catastrophic meltdowns — visuals that have been seared into the public consciousness through historical events and popular culture.

The tragedies of Chernobyl and Fukushima are etched in global memory as stark reminders of the potential dangers of nuclear power. These events, rare as they are, have left a lasting impression, making many wary of embracing nuclear energy as a key component of our energy future.

The fear is multifaceted. There’s the dread of a potential disaster — a malfunction or catastrophic natural event leading to a reactor meltdown, the release of radioactive material, and irreversible harm to people and the environment.

The long-term disposal of nuclear waste is another concern, given its enduring radioactivity and the challenges of finding safe and secure storage sites.

Moreover, the connection between nuclear power technology and nuclear weapons proliferation adds another layer of anxiety, especially in geopolitically tense regions.

Yet, while these fears are not entirely unfounded, they often overshadow the strides made in nuclear safety and technology over the decades.

Modern reactors are designed with multiple safeguards, and the nuclear industry is among the most regulated globally.

Many advocates argue that the actual risks are far lower than perceived, especially when compared to fossil fuels’ environmental and health impacts.

Nonetheless, bridging the gap between the reality of nuclear power’s potential and public apprehension remains challenging.

It requires a complex interplay of understanding the science, acknowledging genuine concerns, and transparently communicating the tangible benefits of nuclear energy in the face of our growing energy demands and environmental imperatives.

Fear = Survival

Being fearful is, in many ways, an evolutionary safeguard. Throughout history, the instinctual tug of fear has been essential for the survival of countless species, including our own.

As humans traversed the rugged landscapes of prehistoric times, this deep-seated emotion served as an early warning system, alerting us to imminent threats like predators or environmental dangers.

This is not mere happenstance; it’s a carefully honed trait woven into the very fabric of our DNA.

At its core, fear is a protector. It prompts rapid responses, heightens our senses, and prepares us for potentially life-saving actions like fight or flight.

Over countless generations, those who effectively harnessed fear had a better chance of surviving and passing on their genes, leading to an inherent predisposition to control of this emotion in subsequent generations.

But while fear was instrumental in our primitive world, its role in modern society is more nuanced.

While we no longer face daily threats to our existence in the same way our ancestors did, our brain’s fear circuitry remains active, habitually responding to modern-day stresses and anxieties. 

This is the primary reason many individuals harbour apprehensions about nuclear energy: Historical incidents and narratives have predominantly showcased its negative aspects, overshadowing its positive potential… at least for the time being.

With that perspective, I find Josh Wolfe’s proposal to rebrand nuclear as “elemental energy” to be a brilliant strategy, although I would keep solar and wind out of it.

This rebranding will prevent the immediate association of nuclear energy with danger. Although it’s a gradual process, such a shift can significantly enhance the likelihood of nuclear energy gaining widespread acceptance.

Here is a video of Michael Shellenberger shared by the subscriber I mentioned earlier. Although this video is a few years old, it remains incredibly accurate, especially now that Germany is in the middle of an energy crisis.

In this video, Michael shares his journey from being a climate activist opposed to nuclear energy to becoming a proponent of it. He presents compelling data to challenge the common misconceptions about nuclear dangers.

Set aside 20 minutes to watch this video. As with most TED Talks, it’s both enlightening and engaging.

From this video, two aspects particularly struck me:

1- The misunderstanding surrounding radiation.

2- The actual casualties resulting from the two major nuclear accidents — Chernobyl and Fukushima (Fukushima = 0 radiation-related deaths).

Apart from concerns about using nuclear weapons, these two factors significantly fuel societal apprehensions.

Yet, the narratives surrounding them have been distorted, and the reality is not as dire as it’s often portrayed.

Subsequently, I stumbled upon another video from 2010.

Presented concisely and captivatingly, this video serves as a time capsule, capturing the expectations around renewable energies of that era.

Before delving into my thoughts on it, it’s essential to recall that humans have an innate tendency to think in linear terms, and this video epitomises that inclination.

Back in 2010, nuclear energy sceptics were touting the vast potential of renewables in the coming years. Fast-forward thirteen years, and although consumption of renewable energy has indeed doubled, it hasn’t reached the lofty heights anticipated back in 2010. 

We’re still grappling with effective renewable energy storage solutions a decade later. As the demand for energy continues its steady climb, nuclear stands out as the cleanest energy source available but also as a real solution on the storage front.

In the early 2000s, a notable shift occurred among many staunch anti-nuclear activists.

While they remained resolutely opposed to its militaristic applications, they began recognising nuclear’s potential in combating climate change.

Figures like Stewart Brand, Michael Shellenberger, George Monbiot, Sting, and even Bono — all once vocal opponents of nuclear energy — began to endorse its merits. 

While some classify Bono as an idiot, it’s undeniable that he has a significant sphere of influence. Changing one’s deeply held beliefs requires immense courage, and George Monbiot’s transformation stands out as a commendable example.

“The anti-nuclear movement to which I once belonged has misled the world about the impacts of radiation on human health.”

These activists recognised the escalating demand for energy and the imperative to address climate change. They realised the importance of re-evaluating their own convictions, acknowledging that demographics remain one of the most potent driving forces in the world.

Demographics

As I said many times already, I’m fascinated by demographics. Though they appear as straightforward data sets, they’re incredibly useful for predicting major trends because shifts in the data take years to alter the overarching trajectory.

Global population growth is anticipated to peak around 2080, barring any unforeseen catastrophic events that drastically reduce the population.

Most of this growth is expected to emerge from Asia and Africa, with India particularly noteworthy as it has recently surpassed China to become the world’s most populous country.

This translates into emerging countries’ energy needs growing rapidly.

China and India have already committed to developing elemental energy, and many new power plants are scheduled to be connected to the grid in the next 24 months.

At the same time, we know that Asia, China and India account for 60% of CO2 emissions.

This translates into energy needs growing = more CO2 emissions.

We can gain insights into global consumption requirements using a basic model centred on demographic growth. This is a very conservative model, as it doesn’t factor in the energy needs of the digital renaissance. 

Growing demographics + Growing energy demand = Growing C02 emissions.

The current renewable energy efforts will be far from sufficient to transition away from fossil energy consumption in time to satisfy growing energy demands.

 

And until we see fossil fuels contracting while green energy expands on a consistent basis year after year, CO2 emissions will not be reduced enough to reach the goals. 

The objectives will need reassessment in the coming years. Though the intent behind the ESG movement was commendable, it unfortunately has been ineffective. Companies merely acquired the privilege to pollute, creating a big opportunity for underhanded schemes.

You’re familiar with the projections surrounding renewable energies. After years of perhaps overly optimistic promotion of green energy solutions, there hasn’t been really significant progress, leading many to doubt the current predictions. Surprisingly, forecasts suggest that elemental energy consumption levels will remain relatively stable despite the numerous plants in development or planning stages (more about this later).

Regarding carbon footprint, elemental energy is one of the cleanest and most efficient ways to create energy. Yet, it’s one that still instils fear. 

Elemental Energy

The clashes between pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear factions have caused more harm than any other factor affecting nuclear energy development.

Media-driven historical myths and biases from renewable energy groups have prevented elemental energy from gaining its rightful position. Sensationalist articles thrive on fueling readers’ fears.

To see if my assumption was correct, I Just typed “nuclear” into Google to see the suggestions… Out of the top five suggestions, four have a negative connotation. 

Then I switched to the news tab, and this is what I saw…

The apprehension surrounding nuclear weapons often overshadows nuclear’s potential as a source of clean energy.

Scrolled down a bit, and this is what I got…

Navigating the rebranding challenge is crucial — a separation of terms could be the solution.

A viable rebranding strategy could be to rename all nuclear energy facets as “elemental energy” while preserving the term nuclear for weapons-associated concerns. This distinction would clearly separate the advantageous components from the contentious ones.

I scoured countless news articles but failed to find even one that portrayed nuclear power positively.

This, even though previously vocal anti-nuclear advocates have converted to the benefits of elemental energy; the nuclear sector has been one of the best-performing this year; several new elemental energy power plants are set to connect to the grid, including a few in emerging markets; and so many countries are looking into the elemental energy solution.

Why this bias? Because negative news and fear are more lucrative than positive stories! The black magic of the algos!

Elemental energy can provide the most reliable baseload, while renewables are also vital to the future energy mix. Elemental energy’s ability to provide consistent, efficient, low-emission energy should be a cornerstone for power grids worldwide.

Elemental energy waste has its own set of merits when compared to residues from other energy sources. Firstly, its waste is compact in nature.

To put it in perspective, the waste produced from a reactor meeting a person’s yearly electricity demand is approximately the size of a standard brick, with only five grams being high-level waste that needs substantial radiation shielding.

This limited volume makes it feasible for utilities to keep the spent fuel either onsite or at temporary storage facilities before moving into long-term storage. 

Secondly, every bit of waste from elemental energy is thoroughly tracked throughout the process. The nuclear industry fully accounts for all its waste.

But terrorists can steal nuclear waste and make weapons!”

While certain components within spent nuclear fuel can be used to produce nuclear weapons, the process is complex, easy to spot, and heavily safeguarded against on an international scale. The typical wastes that people think of as “nuclear waste” (like contaminated materials or protective clothing) have no use in weapons production.

The Waste Storage Fear

When individuals move past the initial perception of nuclear as destructive, the subsequent concern often raised is, What about the waste from nuclear energy?

As we saw in the graphic above, nuclear fuel is highly concentrated — a tiny amount can produce a huge amount of electricity and thus result in minimal waste.

In addition, most of the waste produced exhibits very safe, low-level radioactivity.

However, many people still mistakenly believe that all the waste produced is hazardous and will persist for centuries, a common misconception about elemental energy. This is an informative read if you remain concerned about the waste side of the equation.

Radioactive waste is securely stored to prevent radiation exposure to individuals and to protect the environment from contamination. As time progresses, the waste’s radioactivity naturally diminishes. Thus, storing high-level waste for approximately 50 years is beneficial before its final disposal.

Many solutions are already in place to handle the 3% hazardous material.

On-Site Storage

Initially, used nuclear fuel is stored in pools of water at the nuclear power plants where it was used. This cools down the fuel and provides shielding from its radiation.

Dry Cask Storage

After cooling in the water pools for several years, the used fuel can be transferred to large concrete or steel containers known as casks. These are typically stored on-site at power plants and are a safe and secure method for storing used fuel for many decades.

Deep Geological Repositories

For long-term storage, deep underground facilities are considered the most viable option. These repositories are located hundreds of meters below the ground, ensuring that no significant amount of radioactivity can reach the surface environment. The rock layers serve as a natural barrier, and engineered barriers further shield the waste.

Recycling

Some countries, like France, have adopted recycling, where the used nuclear fuel is chemically processed to extract plutonium and unused uranium. These materials can then be used to make new fuel, while the actual waste, which becomes more compact, is vitrified (turned into glass) and then stored.

Transmutation

This is a more experimental method where certain types of nuclear waste are transformed into other, less harmful nuclear materials through bombardment in reactors or special machines.

On the other hand, fossil fuel-driven energy brings about costly and harmful side effects for society, many of which go unnoticed or are invisible, like CO2 emissions.

While there are regulations for emissions from fossil fuel facilities, they don’t truly address the full repercussions of their waste.

Another crucial aspect to consider is elemental energy’s safety record, which shows a remarkably low mortality rate relative to the amount of energy produced. This rate even includes the impacts of major events like the Fukushima and Chernobyl disasters.

Adopting elemental energy sooner than we have might have shifted the paradigm, but it’s never too late to adapt and make amends.

However, it does feel like we lost a lot of time because of infighting — and obviously, Fukushima didn’t help.

While elemental energy isn’t the silver bullet for all our energy challenges, it presents a viable solution, especially for large populations like India’s and China’s.

It’s foreseeable that Asia will spearhead the elemental energy movement in the coming years. During my call with Justin and Richard (Uranium Insiders), I was told that twenty of the plants under construction will be connected to the grid in the next 24 months. 

This should increase elemental energy output, i.e., the demand for uranium will increase. It has been ticking down the past year, but that is about to change.



Note that It took a decade to get back to pre-Fukushima levels.

We can anticipate a resurgence from previous  demand — I am referring to early adopters who reduced their uptake for various reasons.

The chart below is compelling and leans bullish, but the untapped potential is all in the invisible details.

Japan is finally ready to ramp up its elemental energy production again. France experienced a temporary deceleration due to extended maintenance shutdowns and weather-induced river issues, but the shutdowns are nearing completion. Meanwhile, Germany’s energy crisis has sparked intense discussions about returning to elemental energy.

The Ukraine invasion underscored Europe’s energy dependence on Russia. 

Germany, having concentrated for years on renewables like solar and wind while phasing out elemental energy, found itself in a bind after Russia’s actions.

They have been learning that solar and wind are not sources of energy that are as linear as their models had projected.

The outcome?

After three decades of declining coal production, there has been a shift, with two consecutive years of growth. This winter, Germany will likely rely on coal power plants to maintain its gas supply and stabilise electricity prices. Germany is the poster child of renewable energy failure.

The German opposition is advocating for a reversal of the strategy on elemental energy. It seems inevitable that a change will happen sooner rather than later.

Imagine this: Germany gets a cold winter (which is likely during an El Niño year), and Putin decides to put pressure on Europe again. I’ll let you guess what will happen to natural gas prices…

But also to electricity prices. We will know in less than three months…

India and China will be the sources of new demand, while Europe and the US will most likely increase elemental energy production. Obviously, Japan’s resurgence will also be important. 

In these conditions, It is fair to expect the uranium spot price to stay on trend.

New opportunities usher in fresh players and novel investment avenues in the sector. I’ll delve into this soon, but first, a brief overview of the supply chain.

The Supply Chain

This is a chart based on the TD Cowen uranium supply/demand model. As you can see, demand is expected to exceed supply until 2028. Justin from Uranium Insiders suggests that the demand numbers are very conservative and are likely higher.

Here’s the deal: Uranium isn’t like other commodities where you can simply open new mines or boost production on a whim.

As the International Atomic Energy Agency notes:

“Opening a uranium mine requires significant capital investment and is a long process that often involves 10 to 15 years of lag time before the mine begins operation.”

The quickest solution would be for uranium miners to increase production significantly, which is precisely what Kazatomprom intends to do, but not until 2025.

Meanwhile, France has committed to opening 14 new elemental energy power plants, while South Korea is considering building new elemental energy plants.

We’re on the brink of a fresh chapter for elemental energy. Fukushima is a fading bad memory, and the world is poised to welcome this important energy source again.

The Sector

As the sector matures, it’s drawing in new participants, amplifying the demand exponentially. This influx is indicative of the market’s growth and its potential impact on global energy dynamics

The uranium market is witnessing an unprecedented shift, primarily driven by speculators keen on capitalising on the growing global demand.

At the forefront of this change is Sprott, Inc. Post its acquisition and rebranding of a uranium holding company as SPUT, their aggressive uranium procurement strategy saw them amass more inventory in mere months than the original company had accumulated over 16 years. This accumulation is governed by a rule ensuring additional uranium purchases whenever their stock value exceeds their net asset value.

Harris Kupperman, the esteemed founder and Chief Investment Officer of Praetorian Capital, highlighted earlier this year how Sprott’s approach has catalysed a reflexive loop, perpetually driving up uranium prices.

Delving deeper into this, a noteworthy comment comes from the latest Uranium Insiders report.

“On September 5, 2023, Sprott announced its intention to seek regulatory approval for a new provision targeting ‘industry players’. If approved, this strategy would attract more bids for the Trust’s units, addressing the long-standing issue of trading at a discount to NAV. This move underscores the innovative prowess of John Ciampaglia and his team at Sprott.”

The success of SPUT has inspired other funds to explore similar avenues. With institutions like SPUT amassing and holding vast amounts of uranium, utilities are staring at potential supply shortages.

Given the nonsubstitutable nature of uranium in nuclear energy, countries are waking up to the dire need to secure their uranium sources.

This urgency is not merely a supply challenge; it’s evolving into a full-blown energy security crisis.

Major nuclear players worldwide are being forced into aggressive tactics to ensure uninterrupted uranium supply.

The recent political upheaval in Niger introduces another layer of complexity. With Niger responsible for about 5% of the world’s uranium reserves, any disruption here, especially with the involvement of Orano (a primarily state-owned French entity), can ripple through global supply chains.

In summary, there’s a surge in both new and returning demand, supply capacity is constrained, commitments to more elemental energy plants are on the rise, and there is an influx of new speculators and investors. If this is not setting up the scene for a blockbuster trade, I don’t know what is!

From my perspective, the macro story is pretty clear, and this has the potential to be THE macro story for the next five years.

I posed five crucial questions to Justin and Richard of Uranium Insiders, seeking insights directly from these experts.

After uranium has rallied 440% since the 2020 lows, do you think it is too late for investors to take a position, or can we still consider this to be early?

“We are in year one of a multi-year contracting cycle. While this is not, currently, a ‘contrarian’ investment, the thesis has been incredibly de-risked by the developments of the past 24 months. We believe the sector has multiple years of bullish price action ahead, with the potential for a very long-term super cycle for the uranium commodity.”

Is it technically possible to ramp up mining to match growing demand (consumption + inventories) from new plants coming in the next 24 months? 

“Short answer: no. New uranium mines are notoriously slow to come online. Within the next 24 months, we can reasonably expect some brownfield restarts (Langer Heinrich, Honeymoon, US ISR), and some existing producers increasing production… primarily the Navoi (Uzbekistan) and Kazatomprom (Kazakhstan).” 

What are the solutions for toxic waste management?

“The nuclear industry does not view nuclear waste in the same way as the general populace. ‘What about the waste?’ is the classic question from the uninformed. In fact, the minimal amount of nuclear waste is actually a selling point for nuclear energy.”

https://twitter.com/energybants/status/1698563875522650588 

Could we see a Balkanisation of the uranium market?

“This has already occurred. Currently, Western nuclear utilities — while still receiving deliveries of Russian uranium from legacy contracts — are voluntarily not engaging in new business with Russia.”

Is Sprott physical (SRUUF) a safe way to invest in uranium?

“Most investors interested in the nuclear/uranium thesis would be wise to have some exposure to the physical commodity. The Sprott Physical Uranium Trust (U.UN, U.U, SRUUF) is a highly liquid security that provides this exposure.”

If you are interested in the sector, I strongly suggest signing up for Uranium Insiders. Their insights and reports are the best in the industry and will help you identify opportunities and navigate the sector successfully.

The Investment Vehicles

Before diving into the investment side of the elemental energy narrative, let me share some of my personal views with you.

  • After a strong rally, be ready for some correction and volatility.

  • Regardless of the current price, dollar cost averaging would be my preferred strategy here.

  • I prefer looking into ETFs rather than single stocks, although single stocks will most likely perform better… as long as you choose the right ones.

  • As much as you may believe in the narrative, size accordingly.

  • A black swan event is possible (although with very low odds).

As a starting point and to make it easy at first, focusing on ETFs (highlighted in red is the new junior miners ETF– $153 million in assets) and large caps is the most logical play.

If you want something more detailed, Uranium Insiders produces a focus list of ten stocks split into large, mid, and small-cap. 

It took only a couple of years for the physical ETF (SRUUF) to establish itself as a reference. It is now a decent part of the holdings of both the global uranium ETF and miners ETF.

After breaking out of its flag, URA has established a new trend channel.

Ditto for the SPOTT miners ETF; by the way, miners represent 66% of URA holdings.

Junior miners ETF also got my interest; it is a very small-cap ETF to be treated as a risk position for now.

There are many ways to build a uranium position tailored to your individual risk appetite, understanding, and portfolio composition. However, beginning with an ETF is a straightforward option for those new to the field.

I will leave you today with this great thread by John Quakes (@quakes99) about investing in uranium, with many options and explanations. 

<——————————————->

Conclusion

Nuclear power, despite its potential, faces significant hurdles due to prevailing misconceptions. The predominant concerns revolve around radiation risks, potential accidents, and radioactive waste management. While these apprehensions are valid, they often fail to consider a comprehensive picture of the current situation.

The term nuclear carries with it the weight of historical calamities and warfare, which has led to discussions of rebranding it as elemental energy.

In this piece, I’ve chosen to use elemental energy instead of nuclear power to shed the prejudices associated with the term. The change, in my view, imparts a more neutral and objective tone to the narrative.

Considering its population growth, India’s energy demands will skyrocket in the upcoming 50 years, positioning elemental energy as a cornerstone solution.

Meanwhile, China, despite being the largest global polluter, is actively augmenting its elemental energy capabilities with a clear resolve to continue.

Forecasts suggest that by 2030, Asia could dominate the elemental energy production charts.

Other countries are making strides too. Japan is gradually restarting its nuclear facilities, and France has ambitious plans to erect 14 new plants.

The case for elemental energy is compelling: It is dependable, robust, eco-friendly, and safe. Whether we confront the reality or not, the aspiration of an entirely renewable energy infrastructure relying uniquely on solar, wind, and water power may be overly ambitious and impractical.

Germany’s recent energy crisis underscores this sentiment, highlighting the challenges of transitioning solely to renewables.

It’s enlightening to see some prominent former nuclear sceptics embrace a more positive stance, suggesting deeper layers to the debate than popularly understood. This past year marked a rejuvenation of the nuclear industry, potentially signifying the onset of a prosperous era. Yet, while we navigate the promising horizons of this narrative, it remains essential to be aware of unpredictable events that could reshape the trajectory.

<——————————————->

 

Disclaimer: The content provided in this publication is exclusively for our subscribers’ use and is The Mad King’s intellectual property. Any sharing, reproduction, distribution, or publication of the information contained in this publication on social media platforms or any other medium is strictly prohibited without the express written consent of The Mad King. The content provided is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or any form of advice.

THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED TO SUBSCRIBERS

“There is no great genius without some touch of madness.” — Aristotle

SIGNUP AND BECOME A PRINCE

The Mad King offers unparalleled value, providing in-depth macro analyses, market updates, timely insights, and more. Join hundreds of private and institutional investors who already trust our content to guide their investment decisions.

Prince

The Most Valuable
$ 90 Monthly
  • Market Chronicles
  • The Insider
  • Royal Notes
  • Trade Ideas
  • Archives

Sign Up

Enter your details

Choose Login Details

The final step is to make the payment through Stripe. The Mad King does not store, see, or handle your credit card information, ensuring a secure process.

A FEW WORDS FROM OUR SUBSCRIBERS

Subscriber
Financial Professional
Read More
Well done for dancing so eloquently through the polarized opinions to actually get to the heart of the matter, and raise many uncomfortable issues.​
Subscriber
Private Investor
Read More
A masterclass in the art of cycles. Absolutely love your work, including the titles and graphics. Glad Grant opened the door to the Kings Court.
Subscriber
Retired - CFA
Read More
This is absolutely a fabulous overview of the existing and future cyber security problems we will all be facing sooner rather than later. ​
Subscriber
Financial Professional
Read More
The amount of information you put in each posting has surprised me and shown me the value of your research and charting.
Subscriber
Private Investor
Read More
Original content combined with quality research ; thought provoking and useful for challenging the views I hold.
Subscriber
Financial Professional
Read More
Monthly updates are incredible. Thoughts are distilled into something easy to read and for the layman to understand. Greatly appreciate your work, Remi.
Subscriber
Financial Professional
Read More
TMK is neutral, agnostic advice, based on the business cycle and GMI. To Remi, I’m so glad you revealed your identity, because knowing you’ve tuned your craft working with Raoul at GMI is priceless.
Subscriber
Private Investor
Read More
1. Experience with institutional research. Easy to digest newsletter with a good combo of charts and data. 2. Broad topics ranging from tech, crypto to traditional macro.
Subscriber
Private Investor
Read More
Your content provides me with many, MANY "ah, ha!!" moments that other content providers do not. Excellent content - well presented - and now you are starting to provide actionable intelligence by way of trade ideas, which is excellent!

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTION

Who should subscribe to The Mad King?

Finance Professionals: For deep insights into market trends and economic policies.

Investors and Traders: To aid in making informed investment decisions.

Academics and Students: Complementing academic knowledge with real-world economic analysis.

Business Leaders and Entrepreneurs: Understanding economic landscapes for effective business decisions.

Curious Minds: Anyone interested in the global economy and its interplay with technology.

 

This newsletter is ideal for those who value expert opinions and thorough analysis in the realms of economics and finance.

How frequently is the newsletter published?

The Mad King newsletter is published twice per month. 

How do I subscribe to The Mad King?

To subscribe to The Mad King, visit The Mad King  and follow the prompts to create an account and complete your purchase.

What subscription plans are available?

The Mad King offers three subscription plans: Prince, Analyst, and Institutional.

Is there a trial period or a sample issue I can view before subscribing?

No, The Mad King does not offer a standard free trial. However, we occasionally provide limited access to free trials and make select articles available to the public from time to time.

What topics does The Mad King cover?

The Mad King covers topics in macroeconomics, finance, and technology, with in-depth analysis and insights into global economic trends and market dynamics.

Can I access past issues of the newsletter?

Yes, you can access past issues of The Mad King newsletter through your account on the website.

Are there any exclusive contents or benefits for subscribers?

Yes, subscribers to The Mad King have exclusive access to in-depth articles, expert analyses, and special reports not available to non-subscribers.

What payment methods are accepted?

The Mad King accepts Visa and MasterCard payments processed through Stripe.

How do I cancel my subscription or auto-renewal?

To cancel your subscription or auto-renewal on The Mad King, log into your account, go to the ‘Subscriptions’ tab in the account menu, and select the option to ‘Stop Auto-Subscription’.