How to invest in US nuclear energy boom

Recent news puts a glow on a few related stocks.

By InvestorPlace Feb 13, 2012 10:59AM

By Aaron Levitt

Since Japan's earthquake and tsunami and the resulting Fukushima reactor disaster, the nuclear energy industry certainly has taken it on the chin. The meltdown at the nuclear plant has become synonymous with renewed anxiety about the safety and ethics of atomic energy. To that end, a variety of nations, such as Germany and Switzerland, have begun plans to wind down their nuclear operations and stall new reactor projects.

Some analysts and market pundits have called these reactions the end of the "nuclear renaissance." However, they might want to rethink their positions. A recent landmark decision could usher in a resurgence of nuclear energy growth here in the United States.

Waiting for decades
For the first time in nearly 34 years, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved licenses for the construction of two new nuclear reactors within the nation's borders. The regulating body voted 4 to 1 Thursday to award utility Southern Company (SO) a license to build two Westinghouse AP 1000 reactors at its Vogtle plant near Augusta, Ga. The last nuclear plant to be given a license by NRC was back in 1978, just more than a year before the Three Mile Island reactor accident in Pennsylvania. Although new nuclear power plants have come online in the U.S. during the past 20 years, the plants received their initial permits before 1978. After Three Mile Island, the NRC adopted more stringent safety standards, construction costs for nuclear plants skyrocketed, and the number of new plants dwindled to zero.

For the nuclear power industry, the recent decision by the NRC to approve a new project is monumental. Currently, 13 utilities including Scana (SCG), Exelon (EXC) and Duke Energy (DUK), have applied for construction and operating licenses to build 25 new reactors. Southern's approval could serve as a "starting gun" to getting these projects going.

Giving the state of the economy and the relatively cheap baseload power that nuclear energy provides, the appeal of approving and building these multiyear-long projects certainly holds merit. The Obama administration, through the Department of Energy, granted Southern an $8.3 billion federal loan guarantee for building the new two reactors as an incentive. If the project goes well, about 3,500 new employees could be working at the plant within two years. Congress remains vocal on adding new nuclear capacity to America's grid. Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander, in response to Southern's approval, urged the NRC to "act promptly on the applications awaiting approval for 14 reactors of the same model," according to The New York Times.

On the flip side, the cost to build a new nuclear plant is something to consider. Currently, these expenses exceed traditional natural gas plants and some other renewable alternatives. A typical natural gas plant costs about $1 billion to build 1 GW worth of generation capacity. Southern's nuclear plant will cost $14 billion for just 2.2 GW of generation power. The price tag for laying the foundation and water pipelines leading into the reactor alone is around $4 billion. In addition, the shale gas revolution has led to much lower input costs for natural gas plants. These high costs were one of main reasons behind NRG Energy's (NRG) decision to cancel its nuclear ambitions last year.

Playing the NRC verdict

While nuclear reactors likely won't start popping up all across the country, the NRC's approval of Southern's project can be seen as a major win for the industry. The obvious play would be the utility itself. However, that might not be the best route for investors.

While Southern is a quality utility that pays great dividends, the news of the reactor approval has been telegraphed into the power producer’s shares for some time now. The stock barely budged when the NRC’s verdict was announced last Thursday. In addition, nuclear reactors have a history of high cost overruns. Tennessee’s Watts Bar reactor, which currently is under construction, is behind schedule and costs already are "significantly exceeding" previous building estimates of $2.5 billion.

Odds are, more of these pending licenses will get approved and prospectively built. The Market Vectors Nuclear Energy ETF (NLR) offers a global "catch-all" option for passive investors. The fund tracks 24 different firms associated with the nuclear industry including Vogtle builder Shaw Group (SHAW) and AP 1000 reactor designer Toshiba (TOSBF). Overall, the ETF has performed poorly since the Fukushima disaster, but it could see some extended gains as the U.S. re-enters the nuclear age.

Perhaps the best way to play the United States' nuclear fleet is through the companies that supply the needed uranium fuel. Any new reactor construction certainly will increase demand, and even if this project somehow falls through, the nation's current 104 reactors still need to be fueled. Canadian miner Cameco (CCJ) should be investors' top choice and currently holds around 16% of the world's reserves.

Cameco's latest outlook sees long-term uranium demand growing as construction of new reactors in China will overshadow the decommissioning of plants in Japan and Europe. Any additional U.S. reactor building activity will be icing on the cake for the firm. CCJ shares offer a 1.7% dividend and trade at a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 17.

Investors willing to take on a little risk also should consider these high-potential Russian energy stocks.

As of this writing, Aaron Levitt did not hold a position in any of the aforementioned securities.

Related Articles

Feb 13, 2012 11:46AM
Yeah we really need more nuclear power. Not far from my house sits an idle natural gas plant. It was built like 5 years ago or so in response to the phony blackouts cause by Enron and the rest of the power scammers. The power companies built so many new plants in this area they began producing more electricity than they could sell, at any price! So they shut 'em down. Funny how that never seems to get reported.
Feb 13, 2012 12:22PM
With the US being the Saudia Arabia of Natural Gas and it's falling prices I'm looking to invest more in Gas Fired Plants - Just makes more sense to me !
Please help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of Conductplease use this form to notify the moderators. They will investigate your report and take appropriate action. If necessary, they report all illegal activity to the proper authorities.
100 character limit
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?


Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.

Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.


StockScouter rates stocks from 1 to 10, with 10 being the best, using a system of advanced mathematics to determine a stock's expected risk and return. Ratings are displayed on a bell curve, meaning there will be fewer ratings of 1 and 10 and far more of 4 through 7.

123 rated 1
262 rated 2
480 rated 3
651 rated 4
649 rated 5
629 rated 6
616 rated 7
496 rated 8
346 rated 9
111 rated 10

Top Picks

TAT&T Inc9



Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.

Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.

Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.