OCR Text |
Show Uranium Price Increase Predicted at Meelinq . The price of uranium must top $12 per pound before enough en-ough is marketed to meet projected nuclear power plant requirements. Such was the speculation of Gene Ealy, of David S. Robertson Rob-ertson Associates of Denver and Toronto last weekend at a joint meeting of the A1ME and Grand Junction Geological Geologi-cal Society. It is inevitable that uranium uran-ium will increase above the S8 per pound level, Mr. Ealy maintained, and drew on statistics sta-tistics to back his theories. Sooner or later, he said, utility util-ity companies will want lifetime life-time supplies of fuel committed commit-ted to plant before they ara built. Such is the case with coal, he said. In a story by Gavlord Kirk-ham, Kirk-ham, Grand Junction Daily Sentinel, Mr. Ealy Pointed out that there are insufficient reserves re-serves now to provide a 29-year 29-year supply for reactors projected pro-jected beyond 1973. Present reserves will supply only a 2;-year supply of U308 for reactors projected through 1973, he said. This assumes reserves will be doubled at $12 a pound, and further that the AEC stockpile and Canadian Can-adian reserves will be made available. Ealy said although the AEC reports indicate exploratory and development drilling set a new record in 1937 at 10,-761,00 10,-761,00 feet, "no new districts are known to have been found." Earlier drilling, he said, discovered 8 pounds of U308 per foot drilled; Ealy's figures fig-ures show only 5 poundo . per foot discovered in 1967, while the AEC estimate is even ev-en lower, he said, at 3.3 pounds per foot. He added that it is unlikely that the future success ratio will equal the past success ratio. Ealy feels price increases are certain to come. ."If such prices are prohibitive, until such times as they are. not prohibitive, the demand curve will develop at a lower rate than that currently forecast." He showed points in the 1970's which require doubling known reserves, and matching, all discoveries to date. It therefore there-fore seems reasonable to assume as-sume prices will increase, or that the demand curve will not rise to predictions because be-cause of prohibitive costs, he said. The attitude of most uranium ur-anium producers contacted in the Moab area in past months would give impetus to Mr. Ealy's theories. They appear mildly disinterested in production pro-duction talk at present uranium uran-ium price levels. One company comp-any spokesman indicated the predicted resurgence of production pro-duction activity would not take place until prices reaeff the $15 per pound mark. Added costs of producing ore at the deep levels now deemed necessary is the reason rea-son for the holdback for price increases, the producers indicate. in-dicate. It is not feasible to produce now at prices which were profitable when uranium uran-ium was available at shallow shal-low levels, and when federal money was available for road building, haulage allowances and discovery bonuses. One major company exploring in the Moab area has reportedly reported-ly drilled to a maximum 2600 to 2939 feet in quest of a sizeable ore body. Producers in general objected ob-jected to the recent proposal by the AEC to make its stockpiles stock-piles available at $8 per pound to producers who have been unable to obtain U308 from other sources after reasonable rea-sonable effort. In essence, this imposes an $8 per pound ceiling on ore through the m:d-1973's, they insist. The current commercial prices are a closely guarded secret, but are believed to range from $6 to $8 per pound, depending on delivery date. Jn Moab, where many major ma-jor companies are known t') have holdings, this is not enough en-ough money to incite action. There is little doubt that the expected production activity will come only in the wake of a substantial price increase. |