Scott Melbye argues uranium is in a structural supply deficit that is tightening both spot and long-term markets, with stronger Western policy support, utility restocking, and AI/data-center demand reinforcing a bullish cycle.
Watch on YouTube ›Get the market thesis, key claims, assets, contradictions, and follow-up questions from any financial video — then unlock a version personalized to your portfolio, watchlist, and favorite speakers.
In this Kitco PDAC 2026 interview, the host frames uranium as moving from an exploration story to a production story, with prices having pulled back from a January peak above $101 to the mid-$80s. Scott Melbye, executive vice president of Uranium Energy Corp and CEO of Uranium Royalty Corp, says that pullback is just a breather within a larger uptrend driven by supply-demand fundamentals, geopolitics, and rising energy demand. He cites a near-term uranium deficit of 50 million pounds growing toward 1.7 billion pounds by 2045, saying utilities are returning to the market after under-contracting, while incumbent producers are largely sold out and new supply remains years away. Melbye argues the biggest geopolitical constraints are not Iran but China and Russia, since Russia-related supply remains central to Western fuel markets and Kazakhstan’s output is increasingly tied to Russia, …
Tactically bullish, with the main near-term setup being tightening utility demand against thin spot liquidity and possible policy headlines around a strategic reserve or U.S. stockpiling. The immediate risk is volatility from macro factor moves, but the interview frames pullbacks as buying opportunities as long as higher lows hold.
Over the next few months, the base case is continued re-contracting and selective supply tightness, especially if U.S. permitting reforms and reserve policy start converting into actual domestic production decisions. The setup improves if utilities and hyperscalers keep seeking direct supply, but it weakens if contracting momentum fades or policy support proves slower than expected.
Structurally, the interview argues uranium is entering a long strategic upcycle driven by nuclear expansion, energy security, and fuel-cycle reshoring. If that regime holds, uranium shifts from a cyclical commodity to a critical industrial input with durable policy support and persistent Western supply-chain urgency.
Uranium prices have pulled back from the January peak above $101 to around the mid-$80s, but the broader trend remains up.
Host states the price move and Melbye says the trend has higher highs and higher lows.
There is a near-term uranium deficit of 50 million pounds that grows to 1.7 billion pounds by 2045.
Melbye gives explicit supply-deficit numbers as the core bullish thesis.
Utilities are returning to the market after under-contracting, but incumbent producers are largely already committed and new producers are still years away.
Explains why the deficit should translate into price pressure in spot and term markets.
Is the pullback in uranium prices from $101 to the $86 range just a breather in a much larger cycle?
Yes, the underlying fundamentals have never been better — driven by macro trends (green energy transition, geopolitics) and a 50 million pound near-term deficit growing to 1.7 billion pounds by 2045. Utilities are returning to the market but incumbent producers are fully contracted, and new producers are years away from production, forcing utilities to the thin spot market. The pattern shows higher highs and higher lows with an upward trend.
Do you think geopolitical shocks like the attack on Iran's leadership will affect the uranium price?
The biggest geopolitical impacts come from China and Russia, not Iran. We're in a global resource competition — China will surpass the US as the world's largest nuclear program by 2030, and Russia has significant domestic and client-state needs. The market is bifurcating east-west, and Kazakhstan's supply (the world's largest producer) may not reliably come to the west. Western utilities should focus on western supplies from Australia, Canada, and the US.
Are the $2.7 billion federal contracts enough to build a truly sovereign western uranium supply?
The support is enough to make things happen more quickly. Scott has never seen this level of government commitment across the entire Trump administration — departments of war, commerce, state, energy, and the White House are all engaged in critical minerals. But it can't be all government; strong market signals are also needed.
Unlock the full claims, asset map, scores, related transcripts, follow-up questions, and AI chat — shaped around your portfolio, watchlist, favorite speakers, and risks.
