How Nuclear ETFs Can Benefit from the Climate Change Battle

Despite a bad reputation, nuclear energy is becoming a source of alternative energy interest as we welcome a new era of “clean energy.” There are several exchange traded funds (ETFs) that could stand to outperform if nuclear energy winds up getting a role in fighting global warming.

Nuclear energy is becoming a clearer alternative energy source, however, the question remains on where to put the hazardous waste from the new proposed nuclear plants. The nuclear movement helps address the carbon dioxide problem contributing to global warming, and will help lessen the use of fossil fuels, reports Daniel Terdimen for CNET News.

The so-called cap-and-trade program proposed by President Barack Obama is not enough to offset carbon emissions, some feel. Although the energy bill is a start, there is no solid data on the legislation’s ultimate economic impact, reports The News & Advance.

The final bill that passed the House 219-212 did make passing reference to nuclear energy, but many claim the bill is sorely lacking a definitive role for nuclear energy. Conservation, wind generation, biomass generation and any other niche source of power simply will not meet the nation’s growing needs, some feel.

• Market Vectors Nuclear Energy (NLR): up 5.6% year-to-date

• PowerShares Global Nuclear Energy (PKN): up 8.8% year-to-date

• iShares S&P Global Nuclear Energy Index (NUCL): up 17.8% year-to-date

Comments

[Mad Hedge F...:]

There are several plays here. If we are just on the verge of entering a long term bull market for nuclear energy, as I mentioned in my earlier piece (www.madhedgefundtrader...), then you would have to expect the same for nuclear fuel producers. Last year, the US consumed 55 million pounds of “yellow cake” or uranium oxide, but produced only 4 million pounds. The rest came out of stockpiles or from imports, much if it from the reprocessed Russian nuclear warheads. The new Dept. of Energy under Dr. Stephen Chu has made a big priority of making loan guarantees available to expand nuclear capacity from a lowly 20% of our total grid. The price of uranium is also rising, dragged up by crude, and has bounced 25% from a low this year of $40/pound, to $50. You can take a look at Austin, TX based Uranium Energy Corporation (UEC), which could start production at its Golead mine next year.

Jul 12 12:17 PM

[jerrydd:]

Any investment in new nuke is bound to fail as every one built in the last 20+ yrs has been hurt by 50-100% cost overruns. If smaller, better, cheaper reactors can be done this could change but present reactor designs are not a good investment.

Now add nukes cost 100% more than CSP, wind or biomass added to the lower electric demand from conservation, eff, higher prices and their is little need for new nuke.

The big new energy source will be home, small business RE like CSP, wind, conservation/eff as fossil fuel, nuke costs rise and RE, conservation/eff prices drop. In 5-8 yrs even PV will be 1/2 the price of nuke power. Yes I know of the 'problems' of RE but they are easily dealt with.

The only bight spot in fossil fuels is NG which fed into a gas turbine then it's exhaust feeding an old coal boiler will replace many coal plants at much higher eff and much less pollution, costs and CO2..

Now nuke fuel should be ok but not going to have big gains from now. And now the price has risen places like phosphate companies here in Fla might start making yellow cake as a byproduct of fertilizer production. The real cost though of nuke fuel is in the energy needed to make it so even with a higher price may not mean higher profits as energy costs rise..

Jul 13 08:57 AM

[Ferdinand E...:]

Hmm. If the author is concerned about 'nuclear waste', he should ask the French how they handle this issue. For them, nuclear waste is nuclear fuel if the need arises. As for the cost of nuclear energy, JERRYDD, you are completely wrong. But don't worry, as I have found out you can say anything negative about nuclear without someone asking if you can add and subtract.

Jul 13 11:24 AM

[Jimbo:]

I am not an engineer nor a physicist but it is my understanding that "waste" nuclear fuel can be reprocessed and reused.

Jul 13 02:01 PM

[jerrydd:]

FerinandE

You talk but don't prove anything. My numbers are good and you have none!! Progress Energy here in Fla just priced out new reactors at $9k/kwhr and raising their customers E bills 29% for a plant not running for 10 yrs!!

Vs most RE now coming in at $4-6/kwhr without fuel costs. Which is the better deal? Nuke is a loser, deal with it. Please invest all your money in it and prove me wrong ;^P

Jul 16 12:38 PM