Denison Reports Results From Waterbury PEA, Including Base Case Pre-Tax NPV of $177M and IRR of +39.1%

ISR MINING METHOD ESTIMATED TO PRODUCE USD$12.23 PER LB U ₃ O ₈ OPERATING COSTS J ZONE DEPOSIT RENAMED TTHE HELDETH TÚÉ ("THT") DEPOSIT

Denison Mines Corp. ("Denison" or the "Company") (TSX: DML) (NYSE American: DNN) is pleased to announce the successful completion of an independent Preliminary Economic Assessment(" PEA") for the Waterbury Lake Property ("Waterbury") evaluating the potential use of the in-situ recovery ("ISR") mining method at the Tthe Heldeth Túé (see below, formerly named J Zone) deposit (the "Project") with associated processing at Denison's 22.5% owned McClean Lake mill. View PDF version

The PEA was prepared by Engcomp Engineering & Computing Professionals ("Engcomp") of Saskatoon and demonstrates robust economics for a small-scale Athabasca Basin ISR uranium mining project – including low initial capital costs, low operating costs and globally competitive all-in costs, as follows:

Mine life	~ 6 years (Avg. ~1.6 million lbs U ₃ O ₈ per year)
Projected mine production ⁽¹⁾	9.7 million lbs U ₃ O ₈ (177,664 tonnes at 2.49%)
Average cash operating costs	USD$12.23 ($16.27) per lb U ₃ O ₈
Initial capital costs ⁽²⁾	$112 million
Base case pre-tax IRR ⁽³⁾	39.1%
Base case pre-tax NPV _8%⁽³⁾	$177 million
Base case price assumption	UxC spot price ⁽⁴⁾ (Avg. USD$53.59 per lb U ₃ O ₈ )
Operating profit margin ⁽⁵⁾	77% at USD$53.59 per lb U ₃ O ₈
All-in cost ⁽⁶⁾	USD$24.93 ($33.16) per lb U ₃ O ₈

(1)	See Deposit, Geology & Projected Mine Plan section below for additional information regarding projected mine production. Scheduled tonnes and grade do not represent an estimate of mineral reserves.
(2)	Initial capital costs exclude $20.1 million of estimated pre-construction Project evaluation and development costs.
(3)	NPV and IRR are calculated to the start of pre-production activities for the THT operation.
(4)	Spot price forecast is based on "Composite Midpoint" scenario from UxC's Q3'2020 Uranium Market Outlook ("UMO") for the years 2028 to 2033, and is stated in constant (not-inflated) dollars.
(5)	Operating profit margin is calculated as uranium revenue less operating costs, divided by uranium revenue. Operating costs exclude all royalties, surcharges and income taxes.
(6)	All-in cost is estimated on a pre-tax basis and includes all project operating costs and capital costs, excluding project evaluation and development costs, divided by the estimated number of finished pounds U ₃ O ₈ produced.

Denison is also pleased to announce the re-naming of the J Zone deposit to the "Tthe Heldeth Túé" ("THT") deposit – pronounced "Tey Hel-deth Tway ". The Ya'thi Néné Land and Resource Office ("YNLR"), working together with Denison, reviewed the Conceptual Mining Study ("Concept Study") prepared by Denison for the J Zone deposit prior to initiation of the PEA (see news release dated July 28, 2020 ). The YNLR provided valuable early feedback related to the Project's next steps, and recommended the use of a Dené name for the deposit that would recognize and respect the connection of the Athabasca Denesųłiné to the land where the deposit is located.

This press release constitutes a "designated news release" for the purposes of the Company's prospectus supplement dated November 13, 2020 to its short form base shelf prospectus dated April 2, 2020 .

David Cates , President and CEO of Denison, commented:

"The Waterbury PEA further demonstrates the potential for the ISR mining method to change Canada's global competitiveness in the uranium mining sector – without requiring the discovery and development of massive-scale uranium mines. The selection of the ISR mining method for the Tthe Heldeth Tú é deposit has transformed our expectations for the Project – generating robust preliminary financial results with comparatively modest upfront capital costs and positioning the Project as Denison's second ISR amenable development asset with a cost profile that is highly competitive amongst undeveloped uranium mining assets globally."

David Bronkhorst , VP Operations of Denison further added:

" Denison's technical team successfully modelled the application of the ISR mining method to the Tthe Heldeth Túé deposit in the internal concept study and the preliminary results have now been validated with the completion of an independent NI 43-101 compliant PEA. Denison's plan for the Project includes a 'freeze wall' design adapted from the 'freeze dome' outlined for the Phoenix deposit in the Wheeler River Pre-Feasibility Study ('Wheeler PFS'). The freeze wall design allows for the containment of a smaller area and a significant reduction in up front capital costs, as compared to the 'freeze dome'. Additionally, the freeze wall is expected to offer environmental advantages by providing containment of the ISR mining operation from the depth of the uranium deposit all the way to surface. With the positive results of the freeze wall design demonstrated in the Waterbury PEA, Denison is also evaluating the potential benefits of a freeze wall (rather than freeze dome) for use at Wheeler River's Phoenix deposit."

Waterbury is owned by the Waterbury Lake Uranium Limited Partnership ("WLULP"), of which Denison Waterbury Corp. (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Denison) owns 66.90% and Korea Waterbury Lake Uranium Limited Partnership ("KWULP") owns 33.10%. KWULP is comprised of a consortium of investors, in which Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power ("KHNP") holds a majority position. KHNP is headquartered in Gyeongju, South Korea and is the country's largest electrical power generation company, operating 24 nuclear power reactors and supplying approximately one-quarter of the country's electricity. KHNP is also a significant shareholder in Denison.

The PEA is prepared on a Project (100% ownership) and pre-tax basis, as each of the partners to the WLULP are subject to different tax and other obligations. After-tax results attributable to Denison's ownership interest are provided below under the heading "Indicative Denison Post-Tax Results". All amounts are in Canadian dollars unless otherwise noted.

The PEA is a preliminary analysis of the potential viability of the Project's mineral resources, and should not be considered the same as a Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility Study, as various factors are preliminary in nature. There is no certainty that the results from the PEA will be realized. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.

Preliminary Economic Assessment Highlights

Selection of ISR mining method potentially unlocks the value of the THT deposit : Following the release of the Wheeler PFS in 2018 and subsequent studies aimed at increasing confidence in the ISR mining method for the Phoenix deposit, including the achievement of "proof of concept" (see Denison's news release dated June 4, 2020 ), Denison evaluated the application of the ISR mining method on the THT deposit. Similar to Phoenix , the THT deposit is an unconformity-related uranium deposit, where the mineralization is interpreted to be situated in permeable ground – expected to allow a mining solution to travel within the mineralized zone. Additionally, the basement rock located below the mineralized zone is interpreted to be highly impermeable and is expected to allow for containment of the mining solution beneath the deposit.
Freeze Wall design expected to reduce technical risk and upfront capital costs: Full hydraulic containment of the orebody during mining activities has been planned for the Project with the installation of a freeze wall from surface to the basement rocks underlying the THT deposit– effectively creating containment 360 degrees around the deposit. This design makes use of established ground-freezing technology and conventional diamond drilling to create a physical perimeter around the deposit – containing the mining solution used in the ISR mining process and protecting the surrounding environment to minimize environmental impacts of the Project. Several additional containment methodologies were evaluated as part of the Concept Study – including the freeze dome design outlined in the Wheeler PFS. Results of the Concept Study showed that the freeze wall design offered considerably lower technical risk, equal or greater environmental protection, a smaller environmental footprint, sustainability benefits associated with the utilization of drilling techniques conducive to local employment, and improved economic results with significantly lower initial capital costs.
Existing regional infrastructure offers significant benefit: The Waterbury Lake property is located approximately 15 kilometres from Denison's 22.5% owned McClean Lake uranium mill, in the infrastructure rich eastern portion of the Athabasca Basin region. The PEA assumes the McClean Lake uranium mill will be used to process the Uranium Bearing Solution ("UBS") to be recovered from the ISR wellfield and the nearby Points North Landing ("Points North") facilities will be used for accommodations and other support services. Taken together, this existing regional infrastructure results in a significant reduction in the initial capital costs and operating costs estimated in the PEA.
Potential to be one of the most environmentally responsible mining operations in the world: The combination of the ISR mining method with a high-grade uranium deposit in the Athabasca Basin region has the potential to result in one of the most environmentally protective mining operations in the world – owing to the small foot print of the operation and its minimal surface disturbances, as well as the fact that there are no tailings expected to be generated and no site water discharge planned. The modelled operation also has access to the Provincial power grid and is not expected to rely on diesel generators for primary power on site. Additionally, the freeze wall design provides for the physical isolation of the ISR mining operation from the surrounding environment, which alleviates the primary environmental concern of conventional ISR mining operations and facilitates a controlled restoration process once mining has been completed.

THT ISR Operation – Summary

The THT ISR operation is estimated to produce total mine production of 9.7 million pounds U ₃ O ₈ (177,664 tonnes at 2.49% U ₃ O ₈ ) over an approximate six year mine-life with final processing occurring at Denison's 22.5% owned McClean Lake mill. The PEA includes an indicative timeline with pre-production activities beginning in 2025, and with first production estimated in 2028.

*Table 1 – Waterbury PEA Financial Results (100% Basis)*
Base case pre-tax NPV _8%⁽¹⁾	$177 million
Base case pre-tax IRR ⁽¹⁾	39.1%
Base case pre-tax payback period ⁽²⁾	~22 months
Initial capital costs ⁽³⁾	$112 million
Average annual mine production ⁽⁴⁾	~1.6 million lbs U ₃ O ₈
Mine life	~6 years
Exchange rate ⁽⁵⁾ (US$:CAD$)	1:1.33
Discount rate	8.00%

(1)	NPV and IRR are calculated to the start of pre-production activities for the Project.
(2)	Payback period is stated as number of months to pay-back from the start of uranium production.
(3)	Initial capital costs exclude $20.1 million of estimated pre-construction Project evaluation and development costs.
(4)	Scheduled tonnes and grade do not represent an estimate of mineral reserves. See Deposit, Geology & Mine plan section below for additional information regarding projected mine production.
(5)	Exchange rate applied on uranium sales.

*Table 2 – THT Operating Cost per Pound U ₃ O ₈*
	CAD$	USD$
Mining / Wellfield	5.73	4.31
Milling / Processing	8.07	6.07
Transport to converter	0.53	0.40
Site support and administration	1.94	1.46
Total Operating Costs per pound U ₃ O ₈	$16.27	$12.23

*Table 3 – THT Capital Costs ($ million)* ⁽¹⁾
	Initial	Sustaining	Total
Wellfield	49.6	24.4	74.0
Milling (McClean Lake modifications)	1.1	-	1.1
Surface facilities	2.1	-	2.1
Utilities	0.7	-	0.7
Electrical	5.0	-	5.0
Civil & earthworks	5.8	0.4	6.2
Offsite infrastructure	7.5	-	7.5
Decommissioning	-	19.4	19.4
Construction Indirect	14.0	-	14.0
Subtotal	85.8	44.2	130.0
Contingency	25.8	5.8	31.6
Total Capital Costs (100%)	111.6	50.0	161.6

(1)

Initial capital costs exclude $20.1 million of estimated pre-construction Project evaluation and development costs.

The PEA has been completed in accordance with NI 43-101, Canadian Institute of Mining, Milling and Petroleum (CIM) standards and best practices, as well as other standards such as the AACE Cost Estimation Standards. The PEA is a preliminary analysis of the potential viability of the Project's mineral resources, and should not be considered the same as a Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility Study, as various factors are preliminary in nature. There is no certainty that the results from the PEA will be realized. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.

The technical report supporting the PEA results included in this news release will be filed on SEDAR within 45 days of this release. Estimated capital and operating costs are summarized above, with details provided throughout the balance of this news release. Initial capital costs reflect the estimated cost of building the proposed ISR mining operation and exclude future project evaluation and development costs that must be incurred prior to construction. These costs should be considered when assessing the merit of advancing the project to a development decision in the future.

Price Assumptions & Sensitivities

The base-case economic analysis assumes uranium sales will be made from time to time throughout production at UxC's forecasted annual "Composite Midpoint" spot price from the Q3'2020 Uranium Market Outlook ("UMO"), which is stated annually in constant (non-inflated) 2020 dollars and ranges from ~USD$49 per lb U ₃ O ₈ to USD$57 per lb U ₃ O ₈ during the approximate six year estimated life of the THT operation (assumed for pricing purposes to be from 2028 to 2033). The average base case selling price is USD$53.59 per lb U ₃ O ₈ .

Given the estimated all-in costs of USD$24.93 per lb U ₃ O ₈ , the Project is projected to be able to generate positive economic results at uranium selling prices in the range of recent market conditions, while also offering excellent leverage to a rising uranium price, as outlined below:

*Table 4 – Sensitivity of Waterbury to Uranium Pricing Scenarios (100% Basis)*
	Low Case	Base case	High Case
Uranium price	USD$35 per lb U ₃ O ₈	UxC spot price ⁽³⁾	USD$65 per lb U ₃ O ₈
Pre-tax NPV _8%⁽¹⁾	$38 million	$ 177 million	$ 265 million
Pre-tax IRR ⁽¹⁾	17.4%	39.1%	50.0%
Pre-tax payback period ⁽²⁾	~33 months	~22 months	~18 months

(1)	NPV and IRR are calculated to the start of pre-production activities for the Project.
(2)	Payback period is stated as number of months to pay-back from the start of uranium production.
(3)	Spot price forecast is based on "Composite Midpoint" scenario from UxC's Q3'2020 Uranium Market Outlook ("UMO") for the years 2028 to 203 3 and is stated in constant (not-inflated) dollars.

ISR Mining Method Transforms Potential for Smaller Scale Unconformity Hosted Deposits

The ISR mining method currently accounts for over 50% of the world's uranium production – with most of the production coming from the low-cost mining operations in Kazakhstan . The mining method involves pumping a mining solution (lixiviant) through a suitable orebody via a series of injection wells drilled from surface. As the lixiviant travels through the host rock, it dissolves or leaches the uranium into the mining solution, producing a UBS, which is then pumped back to surface via recovery wells. Once on surface, the UBS is transported (either by pipeline or trucks) to a surface processing plant for the chemical separation / removal of the uranium, and reconditioning of the lixiviant for reinjection into the orebody and further mining cycles.

Notably, the ISR mining method does not involve the mechanical excavation or milling (e.g. crushing and grinding) of the uranium bearing host rock. Additionally, as the leaching process occurs underground, as the lixiviant travels through the host rock, there is little waste produced by the ISR mining process – including no generation of conventional tailings requiring long term storage. Taken together, the capital cost profile of ISR mining is typically a fraction of a conventional uranium mine – which would require a shaft, decline, or open pit to access the orebody, as well as a processing plant capable of accepting the host rock, leaching in vessels on surface, and neutralizing any associated waste for long-term storage.

Similarly, the ISR mining process relies primarily on the flow of the mining solution through the network of injection and recovery wells, which involves a support system of pumps and piping, but does not require heavy equipment, is generally not energy intensive, and does not require miners to work underground or in close proximity to the uranium orebody, which is advantageous from a safety and radiation protection standpoint. These factors, amongst others, contribute to ISR mining operations typically having lower operating cost profiles in comparison to conventional uranium mines.

While the ISR mining method is not currently being used in Canada for uranium mining, unconformity-related uranium deposits in the Athabasca Basin, including the THT deposit and the Phoenix deposit, have all the attributes necessary to be a successful ISR operation, as outlined below:

Mineralization that is situated in permeable ground, allowing the mining solution to travel from the injection well through the orebody and ultimately back to surface via a recovery well;
Mineralization that is readily dissolvable by the mining solution; and
Mineralization that is within a setting which allows for containment of the mining solution – such that the mining solution can be recovered without contaminating the environment or being diluted by natural ground water.

The geological features found in the THT deposit are similar to those of Wheeler River's Phoenix deposit, offering amenability to ISR mining – including the position of the deposit at the unconformity, anticipated permeability of the mineralized zone, and the impermeability of the underlying basement rock.

The results of the PEA for the THT deposit demonstrate that even smaller-scale uranium deposits in the Athabasca Basin region, with access to an existing processing plant, have the potential to become globally competitive as a result of the unique cost advantages associated with the ISR mining method.

As ISR mining is a novel mining method for the Athabasca Basin, there is risk that the Company may not be able to complete ISR operations as outlined in the PEA and/or that the costs could be materially different than estimated.

Deposit, Geology & Projected Mine Plan

Waterbury is host to two uranium deposits, THT and Huskie, with estimated mineral resources listed in the table below.

*Table 5 – Waterbury Mineral resource Statement ^{(1), (2)} (100% Basis, 0.1% grade cut-off)*
Deposit	Deposit Zone	Category	Tonnage (kt)	Grade (% U ₃ O ₈ )	Contained Metal (x1,000 lbs. U ₃ O ₈ )
Tthe Heldeth Túé	East pod ⁽³⁾	Indicated	164	3.2	11,580
	West pod ⁽³⁾	Indicated	128	0.4	1,230
	Total	Indicated	291	2.0	12,810
Huskie	Total	Inferred	268	0.96	5,687

(1)	Numbers may not add due to rounding.
(2)	For further details, see the Company's report entitled "Technical Report with an Updated Mineral Resource Estimate for the Waterbury Lake Property, Northern Saskatchewan, Canada – Mineral Resource Estimate", as filed on SEDAR and available on the Company's website. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
(3)	For presentation purposes for this press release, the THT mineral resource estimate presented in this table has been divided into the East and West pods, to illustrate each zone's estimated size and the potential applicability of mining methods, and is not intended to replace or amend the mineral resource estimate in the technical report referred to in note (2) above.

The PEA has been prepared to evaluate the technical and economic viability of extracting the Indicated mineral resources estimated for the THT deposit, and excludes the Inferred mineral resources estimated for the Huskie deposit. The geologic setting of the Huskie deposit differs from the THT deposit – in that it is hosted entirely in the basement rocks underlying the Athabasca sandstone, and accordingly is not expected to be sufficiently permeable to be amenable to development with the ISR mining method.

As discussed above, the THT deposit is expected to be amenable to ISR mining owing to its position at the contact of the basement rocks and the overlying Athabasca Sandstone, where permeability is increased. The THT deposit is hosted in an east-west fault with the underlying basement consisting of metasediments bounded by orthogneiss to the north and south. The metasediments are 90 to 120 metres thick and include a 20 metre thick graphitic pelitic gneiss.

There are two defined mineralized pods that make up the THT deposit – the West pod and the East pod. The East pod contains over 90% of the Indicated mineral resources and angled drilling from land is expected to allow for ISR wells and the associated freeze wall to reach the THT deposit East pod without constructing a berm or peninsula into the surrounding lakes (see Figure 1). Accordingly, the PEA considers the recovery of the East pod only. A portion of the East pod is expected to be sterilized as a result of the installation of the freeze wall, rendering approximately 206,000 lbs U ₃ O ₈ unrecoverable. The balance of the East pod is assumed to be recoverable based on an 85% mining recovery rate, resulting in total projected mine production of 9.7 million lbs of U ₃ O ₈ , as shown in Table 6 below. Projections of scheduled tonnes and grade do not represent an estimate of mineral reserves.

*Table 6 - Tthe Heldeth Túé Projected Mine Production (100% Basis, 0.0% grade cut-off)*
Tthe Heldeth Túé Deposit Area	Tonnage ⁽¹⁾ (kt)	Grade ⁽¹⁾ (% U ₃ O ₈ )	Contained Metal ⁽¹⁾ (x1,000 lbs. U ₃ O ₈ )	Sterilized Metal ⁽¹⁾ (x1,000 lbs. U ₃ O ₈ )	Projected Mine Production ⁽²⁾ (x1,000 lbs. U ₃ O ₈ )
West Pod	226	0.27	1,347	n/a	0
East Pod	212	2.49	11,634	206	9,713

(1)	Tonnage, Grade, Contained Metal and Sterilized Metal presented at a 0% grade cut off to reflect ISR mining method.
(2)	ISR Mine Projected Production uses the application of an 85% ISR mining recovery factor with a 0% mineral resource grade cut-off.

The THT deposit is extremely well defined by 268 drill holes intersecting uranium mineralization over a combined east-west strike length of up to 700 metres and a maximum north-south lateral width of 70 metres. The mineralization thickness varies from 0.50 to 19.5 metres and the mineralization is found within several metres of the unconformity at depths of 195 to 230 metres. The THT deposit has been drilled, on average, at 10 metre by 25 metre spacings across the deposit and in some cases a more dense drill spacing has been applied. The genesis and structural complexity of the deposit are well understood. There are no outlying elements of the deposit requiring further drill testing.

Importantly, during the PEA process, additional work was undertaken to obtain permeability data for the THT deposit. Permeability values collected from core samples from within the mineralized zone were reviewed by a team of independent experts who concluded that adequate hydraulic conductivity values, necessary to support economical ISR production rates, could be achieved through a combination of engineering controls (e.g. well spacing) and utilization of permeability enhancement techniques. Additional hydrogeologic testing and characterization of the THT deposit will be required to validate these assumptions in future studies.

THT Freeze Wall Design

In conventional ISR operations, containment of the mining solution is typically achieved by natural impermeable bounding layers in the geological strata and/or by creating a natural drawdown (via pumping) of the water table towards the ore zone. At the THT deposit, there is a natural impermeable layer below the deposit, in the form of a competent package of basement rocks, but the deposit is otherwise hydraulically connected to the vast regional groundwater system in the overlying sandstone formation that defines the Athabasca Basin. An artificial freeze wall is planned to isolate the ISR wellfield from the surrounding environment and contain the mining solution within the mineralized zone.

The freeze wall is expected to be established by drilling a series of vertical or angled drill holes from surface. Once the hole has been completed, it will be cased with a dual-layered pipe that will allow for the circulation of a low-temperature brine solution in the holes, which is designed to remove heat from the ground and result in the freezing of the natural groundwater in the vicinity of the freeze hole. The frozen ground will expand out from each freeze hole and merge together with the frozen ground associated with an adjacent freeze hole, establishing an impermeable frozen wall that will surround the perimeter of the deposit from surface to depth. The freeze holes will also be keyed into the basement rock below the deposit to effectively create an in-ground leach vessel for the ISR mining to take place within.

The freeze wall design is comprised of 92 holes planned at 7 metre spacing to a target depth of 200 metres, which will extend below the unconformity elevation into the basement rock. This represents a total of 28,766 metres of drilling, which is anticipated to be completed using commonly used diamond drilling methods conducive to local employment. This drilling method and design has a much lower technical risk profile than the horizontal drilling required as part of the freeze dome design included in the Wheeler PFS, as both diamond drilling and the associated ground freezing in vertical or angled drill holes, are well established throughout the world and are already in use in the existing mining operations in the Athabasca Basin region. The PEA assumes that it will take 12 months, after installing the necessary freeze holes, for the ground freezing process to advance to a sufficient point to achieve the desired level of containment.

Several other containment options were investigated as part of the Concept Study, including the freeze dome design outlined in the Wheeler PFS. The installation of a freeze wall showed significant advantages in comparison to a freeze dome, with a much lower technical risk profile and equal or greater environmental protection, as well as a smaller environmental footprint, and greater potential for community benefits. Denison is evaluating a potential adaptation to the ground freezing containment design at Wheeler River to take advantage of the potential benefits of a freeze wall design similar to the proposed design for the THT deposit.

See Figure 1 for proposed THT Wellfield and Freeze Wall Containment Configuration

ISR Wellfield Design

Conventional ISR roll-front uranium deposits are typically spread out over several square kilometres of area, owing to the low-grade nature of the deposits. An ISR uranium mining operation in the United States or Kazakhstan will typically have uranium grades in the range of 0.03 - 0.30% U ₃ O ₈ . Accordingly, the low-grade nature of these deposits, combined with well spacing, reagent consumption, surface piping and pumping distribution systems, all contribute to create economic thresholds which impact the viability of some deposits.

In the case of the THT east pod, the ore is confined to a relatively small area (300 metres x 70 metres) and has demonstrated itself to be readily leachable in laboratory testing. The average grade of mineralization in the east pod (approximately 2.49% U ₃ O ₈ ) is also several times higher than a typical low-grade ISR operation.

The wellfield design included in the PEA uses 184 wells at 7 metre spacing arranged in a 5-spot pattern, with four injection wells around one recovery well. The wells will be drilled from surface within the freeze wall and angled out to penetrate the mineralized zone at depth with a roughly 7 metre spacing. The maximum drilling angle is limited to 45 degrees to reduce the technical risk of drilling and well installation.

Eight monitoring wells will be installed outside of the freeze wall to detect and remediate any excursion of lixiviant from the mining zone, which is considered unlikely due to the containment of the freeze wall.

*Table 7 – Summary THT ISR Wellfield Wells*
	Number of Wells	Drill Metres
Recovery Wells	66	20,637
Injection Wells	118	36,896
Monitoring Wells	8	1,750
Total	192	59,283

See Figure 1 for proposed THT Wellfield and Freeze Wall Containment Configuration

Metallurgy, Lixiviant Supply & Processing of UBS

Production of the lixiviant mix and final mineral processing of the UBS expected to be recovered from the THT deposit is assumed to occur at the nearby McClean Lake mill. The mill is owned by the McClean Lake Joint Venture ("MLJV") of which Orano Canada Inc. holds a 70% interest, Denison Mines Inc. (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Denison) holds a 22.5% interest, and OURD ( Canada ) Co., Ltd. holds a 7.5% interest. The mill is currently processing material from the Cigar Lake mine under a toll milling agreement (up to 18 million lbs U ₃ O ₈ per year); however, it has approximately 6 million lbs U ₃ O ₈ per year in additional licenced processing capacity, with a total licensed capacity of up to 24 million lbs U ₃ O ₈ per year. The PEA assumes a recovery rate of 98.5% from the processing of UBS from the THT deposit at the McClean Lake mill.

The lixiviant mix needed at the THT site is anticipated to be a low-ph (acidic) solution, which is capable of being generated by the existing acid plant at the McClean Lake mill and transported by trucks and specifically designed transport containers to the THT site by road (45 kilometres one way). The trucks would then complete their return loop to the McClean Lake mill transporting the UBS from the wellfield back to the McClean Lake mill for final processing.

Historical metallurgical testing of mineralized core recovered from the THT deposit and surrounding deposits was used to estimate lixiviant and UBS characteristics. In comparison to ores milled at the McClean Lake mill, mineralization from the THT deposit contains significantly fewer contaminants of concern, which further confirms the ability of the McClean Lake mill to refine the UBS into a high-quality yellowcake product with minimal waste streams. A metallurgical test program was developed for the purpose of the Waterbury PEA and was completed in 2020 to further support the selected production rate with a UBS uranium concentration of 7 grams per litre ("g/l").

The lixiviant mix has been estimated to require 100 g/l of acid to be injected in the deposit with free acid concentration remaining in the resulting UBS of 80 g/l. This effectively results in an acid consumption rate of 20 g/l to mine the THT deposit with ISR. The UBS recovered from the THT wellfield would be inserted directly into the McClean Lake mill's leaching process stream to allow for the remaining acid in the UBS to be used to leach co-milled ores from Cigar Lake or other sources. Based on this process, the McClean Lake mill is expected to require minimal modifications to accommodate the UBS from the THT deposit. Expected mill modifications have been costed and are included in the Project economics.

While the PEA assumes the use of the McClean Lake mill, the actual use of the McClean Lake mill's acid generation and uranium processing capabilities will require the negotiation of a toll milling agreement. The PEA approximates the anticipated cost of using the McClean Lake mill facilities, based on precedent agreements, but no such terms have been negotiated and/or agreed with the owners of the MLJV.

Site Infrastructure

Infrastructure requirements for the THT site are minimal, due to its proximity to the existing Mc Clean Lake mill and the Points North Landing facility. Given the assumed use of the McClean Lake mill, the THT ISR operation is expected to essentially operate as a wellfield site with minimal local infrastructure. Coupled with the assumed ability to lodge the workforce at the nearby Points North Landing facilities, project construction risk and capital costs associated with reaching first production are significantly reduced. The PEA includes the following key site infrastructure elements:

Thirteen-kilometre site power line and associated fixturing connected to the Provincial power grid;
1.5 kilometre extension of the existing access road to the adjacent Roughrider property;
Site operations centre including offices, water and sewage;
Supplies warehousing and fuel storage facilities;
Emergency / back-up power generators;
Wash bay, scanning facilities for trucks transporting UBS to McClean Lake; and
UBS, lixiviant & drilling waste pads

Construction activities required to install the wellfield and associated equipment for mining the THT deposit is relatively simple from a technical standpoint and is expected to involve limited risk to capital costs.

See Figure 2 for Proposed THT Site Layout

See Figure 3 for THT Deposit Regional Location Map

See Figure 4 for Proposed THT Site Location Map

Production Schedule

Once commenced, construction is expected to occur over approximately 2.5 years with the critical path to production being establishing the freeze wall. Mine production is expected to begin part way through the first calendar year after construction is completed with approximately 840,000 lbs of U ₃ O ₈ mill production expected in year one. In years two through five, mill production ramps up to a steady-state annual production level of 2.1 million lbs U ₃ O ₈ per year, with total U ₃ O ₈ finished produced expected to be 9.6 million lbs over an approximate six-year period.

*Table 8 – Tthe Heldeth Túé East Pod Deposit Overall Projected Production* ⁽¹⁾
	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3	Year 4	Year 5	Year 6	Total
Mined tonnes	15,599	38,994	38,994	38,994	38,994	6,089	177,664
Grade	2.49%	2.49%	2.49%	2.49%	2.49%	2.49%	2.49%
Mine production (millions lbs U ₃ O ₈ )	0.853	2.132	2.132	2.132	2.132	0.333	9.713
Finished goods (millions lbs U ₃ O ₈ ) ⁽²⁾	0.840	2.100	2.100	2.100	2.100	0.328	9.567

(1)	Numbers may not add due to rounding.
(2)	Reflects 98.5% recovery rate assumed for processing of UBS from THT deposit at the McClean Lake mill. Projections of scheduled tonnes and grade do not represent an estimate of mineral reserves.

Indicative Denison Post-Tax Results

The PEA is prepared on a pre-tax and 100% ownership basis, as each partner to the WLULP is subject to different tax and other obligations. Denison has completed an indicative post-tax assessment that reflects its ownership interest in the WLULP (66.90%), the impact of expected toll mill fees recovered from its 22.5% interest in the MLJV, and the benefit of Denison's applicable existing tax shelter balances.

Net Saskatchewan sales royalties consist of the resource surcharge (3%), and the basic uranium royalty (5%), which is partially offset by the resource credit (0.75%). These amounts are included in the pre-tax NPV calculations throughout the PEA; however, they are excluded from the U ₃ O ₈ operating cost per pound metrics, as they vary with the value of assumed uranium sales. The profit from operations is subject to an additional Provincial uranium profit royalty, which is treated as an income tax, and allows for the use of certain tax shelter balances.

Denison's post-tax indicative results for the THT project are summarized below and are based on the prevailing Federal and Provincial taxation regulations in place at the time of the PEA as well as Denison's 66.90% ownership of the property as of the end of November 2020 .

*Table 9 – Denison Indicative Post-Tax Results (66.90% ownership)*
Initial capital costs – Denison Share ⁽¹⁾	$75 million

Base case post-tax IRR ⁽²⁾	30.4%
Base case post-tax NPV _8%⁽²⁾	$72 million
Base case post-tax payback period ⁽³⁾	~ 23 months

High case post-tax IRR ⁽²⁾	38.9%
High case post-tax NPV _8%⁽²⁾	$109 million
High case post-tax payback period ⁽³⁾	~19 months

Low case post-tax IRR ⁽²⁾	13.5%
Low case post-tax NPV _8%⁽²⁾	$14 million
Low case post-tax payback period ⁽¹⁾	~34 months

(1)	Initial capital cost excludes estimated pre-construction Project evaluation and development costs
(2)	NPV and IRR are calculated to the start of pre-production activities for the THT operation.
(3)	P ayback period is stated as number of months to pay-back from the start of uranium production.

Development Outlook

The results of the PEA demonstrate the potential for robust project economics – highlighting the potential for the ISR mining method to unlock considerable value in the THT deposit, despite its relatively small resource size. The future initiation of a PFS is supported by the PEA conclusions and will be required to further de-risk the application of the IRS mining method at the THT deposit. The timing of a future PFS for the THT deposit is expected to be dependent on receipt of the requisite partnership approvals and Denison's future efforts to advance and further de-risk the ISR mining method for the Phoenix deposit at the Company's flagship Wheeler River property.

Denison is the industry leader in advancing the use of the low-cost ISR mining method amongst the high-grade uranium deposits of the Athabasca Basin. The PEA for the THT deposit demonstrates the potential for Denison to convert its existing project portfolio (including an extensive exploration portfolio) into a portfolio of low-cost development assets that would supplement the Company's flagship Wheeler River project and uniquely position the Company to offer nuclear utility customers uranium from a diverse portfolio of supply sources in future years.

About Denison

Denison is a uranium exploration and development company with interests focused in the Athabasca Basin region of northern Saskatchewan, Canada . The Company's flagship project is the 90% owned Wheeler River Uranium Project, which is the largest undeveloped uranium project in the infrastructure rich eastern portion of the Athabasca Basin region of northern Saskatchewan . Denison's interests in Saskatchewan also include a 22.5% ownership interest in the MLJV, which includes several uranium deposits and the McClean Lake uranium mill, which is contracted to process the ore from the Cigar Lake mine under a toll milling agreement, plus a 25.17% interest in the Midwest deposits and a 66.90% interest in the THT and Huskie deposits on the Waterbury Lake property. The Midwest, THT and Huskie deposits are located within 20 kilometres of the McClean Lake mill. In addition, Denison has an extensive portfolio of exploration projects in the Athabasca Basin region.

Denison is engaged in mine decommissioning and environmental services through its Closed Mines group, which manages Denison's Elliot Lake reclamation projects and provides post-closure mine and maintenance services to industry and government clients.

Denison is also the manager of Uranium Participation Corporation, a publicly traded company listed on the TSX under the symbol 'U', which invests in uranium oxide in concentrates and uranium hexafluoride.

Follow Denison on Twitter
@DenisonMinesCo

Qualified Persons

The technical information contained in this release has been reviewed and approved by Mr. David Bronkhorst , P.Eng, Denison's Vice President, Operations, who is a Qualified Person in accordance with the requirements of NI 43-101.

The Mineral Resource Estimates contained in this release have been reviewed and approved by Mr. Andy Yackulic , Denison's Director, Exploration, who is a Qualified Person in accordance with the requirements of NI 43-101.

Gordon Graham , VP mining of Engcomp, is an independent qualified person in accordance with the requirements of 43-101 and has reviewed and approved the summary of the PEA contained in this news release.

Data Verification

For a description of the data verification, assay procedures and the quality assurance program and quality control measures applied by Denison, please see Denison's Annual Information Form dated March 13, 2020 filed under the Company's profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com

The Mineral Resource estimates presented in the PEA were independently reviewed and audited for the Tthe Heldeth Túé (J Zone) Deposit and for the Husky Deposit as described in "Technical Report with an Updated Mineral Resource Estimate for the Waterbury Lake Property, Northern Saskatchewan, Canada – Mineral Resource Estimate", dated December 21, 2018 as filed on SEDAR and available on the Company's website.

Further information about the PEA referenced in this news release, including information in respect of data verification, key assumptions, parameters, risks and other factors, can be found in the technical report for Waterbury that the Company intends to file on SEDAR and on the Company's website within 45 days from the date of this news release.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

Certain information contained in this news release constitutes 'forward-looking information', within the meaning of the applicable United States and Canadian legislation concerning the business, operations and financial performance and condition of Denison.

Generally, these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as "plans", "expects", "budget", "scheduled", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "anticipates", or "believes", or the negatives and / or variations of such words and phrases, or state that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will be taken", "occur", "be achieved" or "has the potential to". In particular, this press release contains forward-looking information pertaining to the results of, and estimates, assumptions and projections provided in the PEA, including future development methods and plans, market prices, costs and capital expenditures; the Company's current plans with respect to the development of the Project; the results of, and estimates, assumptions and projections provided in, the Wheeler PFS; the Company's current intentions to evaluate the potential benefits of a freeze wall for use at the Wheeler River Phoenix deposit; assumptions regarding Denison's ability to obtain all necessary regulatory approvals to commence development in accordance with the PEA; Denison's percentage interest in its projects and its agreements with its joint venture partners; and the availability of services to be provided by third parties. Statements relating to "mineral resources" are deemed to be forward-looking information, as they involve the implied assessment that, based on certain estimates and assumptions, the mineral resources described can be profitably produced in the future.

Forward looking statements are based on the opinions and estimates of management as of the date such statements are made, and they are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements of Denison to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. For example, further studies, including a PFS, may not be undertaken if the results of the PEA are not maintained after further testing; Denison may decide or otherwise be required to discontinue the related work if it is unable to maintain or otherwise secure the necessary resources (such as testing facilities, capital funding, regulatory approvals, etc.) or operations are otherwise affected by COVID-19 and its potentially far-reaching impacts. Denison believes that the expectations reflected in this forward-looking information are reasonable but no assurance can be given that these expectations will prove to be accurate and results may differ materially from those anticipated in this forward-looking information. For a discussion in respect of risks and other factors that could influence forward-looking events, please refer to the factors discussed in Denison's Annual Information Form dated March 13, 2020 or subsequent quarterly financial reports under the heading 'Risk Factors'. These factors are not, and should not be construed as being exhaustive.

Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The forward-looking information contained in this news release is expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. Any forward-looking information and the assumptions made with respect thereto speaks only as of the date of this news release. Denison does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking information after the date of this news release to conform such information to actual results or to changes in Denison's expectations except as otherwise required by applicable legislation.

Cautionary Note to United States Investors Concerning Estimates of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources and Probable Mineral Reserves: This press release may use the terms 'measured', 'indicated' and 'inferred' mineral resources. United States investors are advised that while such terms have been prepared in accordance with the definition standards on mineral reserves of the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum referred to in Canadian National Instrument 43-101 Mineral Disclosure Standards ('NI 43-101') and are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, these terms are not defined under Industry Guide 7 under the United States Securities Act and, until recently, have not been permitted to be used in reports and registration statements filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ('SEC'). 'Inferred mineral resources' have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or other economic studies. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of measured or indicated mineral resources will ever be converted into mineral reserves. United States investors are also cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable. In addition, the terms "mineral reserve", "proven mineral reserve" and "probable mineral reserve" for the purposes of NI 43-101 differ from the definitions and allowable usage in Industry Guide 7. Effective February 2019 , the SEC adopted amendments to its disclosure rules to modernize the mineral property disclosure requirements for issuers whose securities are registered with the SEC under the Exchange Act and as a result, the SEC now recognizes estimates of "measured mineral resources", "indicated mineral resources" and "inferred mineral resources". In addition, the SEC has amended its definitions of "proven mineral reserves" and "probable mineral reserves" to be "substantially similar" to the corresponding definitions under the CIM Standards, as required under NI 43-101. However, information regarding mineral resources or mineral reserves in Denison's disclosure may not be comparable to similar information made public by United States companies.

Figure 1 Proposed Tthe Heldeth Túé Wellfield and Freeze Wall Containment Configuration

Figure 2 Proposed Tthe Heldeth Túé Site Layout

Figure 3 Tthe Heldeth Túé Deposit (Waterbury Lake) Regional Location Map

Figure 4 Proposed Tthe Heldeth Túé Site Location Map

View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/denison-reports-results-from-waterbury-pea-including-base-case-pre-tax-npv-of-177m-and-irr-of-39-1-301174476.html

SOURCE Denison Mines Corp.

News Provided by PR Newswire via QuoteMedia

Denison Mines DML:CA DNN Uranium Investing

2024 Uranium Outlook Report

After a stellar 2023, the question is whether uranium will continue to rise steadily or spike higher like it did in the last cycle.

Our journalists have reached out to the insiders to get you their best forecasts and tips on the best way to invest in uranium in 2024.

A Sneak Peek At What The Insiders Are Saying

“We don't need any more catalysts. We've got a 30 million to 50 million pound supply deficit in the market probably for the next five years. That's what we're looking at. And that's what's going to move the price"
— Justin Huhn, Uranium Insider

"To us (nuclear energy) was always the answer. And while everyone seems very pessimistic about everything, I think that perhaps we could be on the verge of a huge, major transformation where finally we do appreciate nuclear for the unbelievable technology that it is."
— Adam Rozencwajg, Goehring & Rozencwajg

Who We Are

The Investing News Network is a growing network of authoritative publications delivering independent, unbiased news and education for investors. We deliver knowledgeable, carefully curated coverage of a variety of markets including gold, cannabis, biotech and many others. This means you read nothing but the best from the entire world of investing advice, and never have to waste your valuable time doing hours, days or weeks of research yourself.

At the same time, not a single word of the content we choose for you is paid for by any company or investment advisor: We choose our content based solely on its informational and educational value to you, the investor.

So if you are looking for a way to diversify your portfolio amidst political and financial instability, this is the place to start. Right now.

2024 Uranium Outlook Report

Uranium Price Update: Q1 2024 in Review

Justin Huhn: Uranium Price, Supply and Stocks in 2024 — Plus Cameco Analysis

Lobo Tiggre: Uranium Back on the Table, When Will Gold Stocks Move?

Gwen Preston: Gold Gearing Up for Next Move, Safest Bets in Uranium

Top 5 Canadian Uranium Stocks

Uranium Price Update: Q1 2024 in Review

The uranium spot price displayed volatility in Q1, rising to a high unseen since 2007 before ending the quarter below US$90 per pound. U3O8 values shed 3.96 percent over the three month period, but experts believe fundamentals remain strong and expect the sector to benefit from various tailwinds in the months ahead.

Supply remains a key factor in the uranium landscape, with a deficit projected to grow amid production challenges. With annual output well below the current demand levels, the supply crunch is expected to be a long-term price driver.

“Supply-side fragility continued to be one of the key themes in Q1, especially the news out of Kazakhstan that production would be significantly lower than expected in 2024 than previously thought,” Ben Finegold, associate at London-based investment firm Ocean Wall, told the Investing News Network in an interview.

These favorable fundamentals are expected to support uranium prices for the remainder of the year.

Finegold also noted that spot market activity highlights how sensitive the sector is to supply challenges.

“Spot market prices have also been a key talking point as volatility in pricing has increased dramatically in Q1 to both the upside and downside,” he explained. “It has brought to light just how thinly traded the spot market is, but interestingly term prices have only continued to rise, which is indicative that the long-term fundamentals remain intact.”

Sulfuric acid shortage impeding supply growth

The U3O8 spot price opened the year at US$91.71 and edged higher through January 22, when values hit a 17 year high of US$106.87. However, the near two decade record was short lived, and by month’s end uranium was around US$100.

Uranium price, Q1 2024.

Uranium price, Q1 2024.

Chart via Cameco.

Some of the price positivity early in the quarter came as Kazatomprom (LSE:KAP,OTC Pink:NATKY) warned that it was expecting to adjust its 2024 production guidance due to “challenges related to the availability of sulfuric acid.”

The state producer and major uranium player confirmed the reduction on February 1, underscoring the importance of sulfuric acid in its in-situ recovery method and describing its efforts to secure supply.

“Presently, the company is actively pursuing alternative sources for sulfuric acid procurement,” a press release states.

“Looking ahead in the medium term, the deficit is expected to alleviate as a result of the potential increase in sulphuric acid supply from local non-ferrous metals mining and smelting operations. The company also intends to enhance its in-house sulfuric acid production capacity by constructing a new plant.”

In 2023, Kazatomprom initiated the establishment of Taiqonyr Qyshqyl Zauyty to oversee the construction of a new sulfuric acid plant capable of producing 800,000 metric tons annually.

In the years ahead, the company is aiming to bolster its sulfuric acid production capacities through existing partnerships to achieve a consolidated production volume of approximately 1.5 million metric tons.

In the meantime, disruptions to Kazakh output will only grow the market deficit.

According to the World Nuclear Association, total global uranium production in 2022 only satiated 74 percent of global demand, a number that is likely to shrink as nuclear reactors in Asian countries begin coming online.

“Kazakhstan is the largest producer of uranium in the world — 44 percent. We like to think of Kazakhstan as the OPEC of uranium,” John Ciampaglia, CEO of Sprott Asset Management, said during a recent webinar.

Kazatomprom forecasts its adjusted uranium production for 2024 will range between 21,000 and 22,500 metric tons on a 100 percent basis, and 10,900 to 11,900 metric tons on an attributable basis. While in line with the company’s 2023 output, the major had to forgo a production ramp up due to the sulfuric acid shortage and development issues.

Analysts and market watchers foresee the sulfuric acid shortage being a long-term price driver.

“The sulfuric acid issue in Kazakhstan is a systemic problem that we do not believe will go away any time soon,” said Finegold. “While the company is doing what they can to alleviate pressures on sulfuric acid supplies, we believe their ability to ramp up production will be hindered for several years before their third domestic plant comes online. As such, we do not see Kazakh uranium production increasing significantly over the next three to four years.”

COP28 nuclear commitment supporting demand

The U3O8 spot price spiked again in early February, reaching US$105 before another correction set in.

As Finegold explained, some of the retraction was the result of profit taking from short-term holders.

“Financial speculators looking to lock in profits towards March year ends played a role, but as we know these moves are achieved on very little volume, so the point remains that the long-term thesis remains unchanged,” he said.

Finegold went on to highlight the different investment perspectives within the market.

“Spot market participants trade on very different parameters and time horizons to one another,” he said. “A trader and a hedge fund, for example, act in a totally different manner to a utility who are long-term thinkers.”

Despite February's slight contraction, uranium prices have remained elevated above US$80.

Some of this long-term support is the result of a COP28 nuclear capacity declaration. At the organization's December meeting in Dubai, more than 20 countries signed a proclamation to triple nuclear capacity by 2050.

There are currently 440 operational nuclear reactors with an additional 13 slated to come online this year and another 47 expected to start electricity generation by 2030. For Finegold, this commitment to building and fortifying nuclear capacity has been uranium's most prevalent demand trend. “The demand side of the equation remains robust and growing at a time when the supply side has never been more fragile,” he commented.

Others also believe the COP28 commitment was a tipping point for the uranium market that spawned several announcements about mine restarts and project extensions.

“Governments around the world have acknowledged that they need to be more supportive, not just financially, but in terms of expediting new projects, expediting the environmental permitting processes for new uranium mines,” said Sprott’s Ciampaglia during the webinar. “And it's not just happening in one country — with the exception of one or two outliers in Europe, this is happening around the globe.”

Geopolitical risk and resource nationalism are price catalysts

Uranium prices continued to consolidate from mid-February through mid-March, but remained above US$84.

This positivity saw several uranium companies in the US, Canada and Australia announce plans to bring existing mines out of care and maintenance. In late November, uranium major Cameco (TSX:CCO,NYSE:CCJ) announced it was restarting operations at its McArthur River/Key Lake project in Saskatchewan after four years.

In January, the McClean Lake joint venture which is co-owned by Denison Mines (TSX:DML,NYSEAMERICAN:DNN) and Orano Canada, reported plans to restart its McClean Lake project, also located in the Athabasca Basin of Saskatchewan.

South of the border, exploration company IsoEnergy (TSXV:ISO,OTCQX:ISENF) is gearing up to restart mining at its Tony M underground mine in Utah. “With the uranium spot price now trading around US$100 per pound, we are in the very fortunate position of owning multiple, past-producing, fully permitted uranium mines in the U.S. that we believe can be restarted quickly with relatively low capital costs," IsoEnergy CEO and Director Phil Williams said in a February release.

Building North American capacity is especially important ahead of the global nuclear energy ramp up and the ongoing geopolitical tensions between Russia and the west. While nuclear power is used to provide nearly 20 percent of America's electricity, the nation produces a very small amount of the uranium it needs.

Instead, the country imports as much as 40.5 million pounds annually.

According to the US Energy Information Administration, 27 percent of imports come from ally nation Canada, while 25 percent of imports come from Kazakhstan and 11 percent originate in Uzbekistan — both considered allies of Russia.

Commenting on that topic, Finegold noted, “The ongoing talk around US sanctions remains the most significant geopolitical catalyst for the sector." He added, "While we do not believe sanctions could be enforced immediately, it will send a signal to the market that Russia will no longer be involved in the largest uranium market in the world and would inevitably have an impact on fuel cycle component prices.”

If sanctions do limit imports from Russian allies, Finegold expects these countries to form stronger ties to China.

“Outside of this, the relationship between Kazakhstan and China remains one to watch as the Chinese continue their nuclear rollout strategy and look to procure millions of Kazakh-produced pounds,” he added.

Uranium price outlook remains positive

After hitting a Q1 low of US$84.84 on March 18, uranium began to move positively, ending the three month session in the US$88 range. Commitments to nuclear capacity, the energy transition and stifled supply will continue to be the most prevalent market drivers heading into the second quarter and the rest of the year.

“We believe uranium prices will significantly outrun the recent US$107 highs from February in 2024, driven by a fundamental supply/demand imbalance,” said Finegold. “Producers will continue to cover production shortfalls, while utilities struggle to replenish inventory shortages.”

The Ocean Wall associate went on to note, “The inherent appetite of traders and financial speculators will continue to drive prices higher. These demand drivers are converging at a time when supply has never looked more fragile.”

Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!

Securities Disclosure: I, Georgia Williams, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

Editorial Disclosure: The Investing News Network does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported in the interviews it conducts. The opinions expressed in these interviews do not reflect the opinions of the Investing News Network and do not constitute investment advice. All readers are encouraged to perform their own due diligence.

Additional information on uranium stock investing — FREE

Justin Huhn: Uranium Price, Supply and Stocks in 2024 — Plus Cameco Analysis

All eyes were on uranium at the end of 2023 as the energy fuel soared through US$100 per pound.

But where is the market headed this year? Justin Huhn, founder and publisher of Uranium Insider, shared his thoughts in an extensive interview with the Investing News Network, emphasizing his continued bullishness.

Outlining current supply/demand dynamics, Huhn said that although 2023's sizeable deficit of about 40 million pounds will shrink a little in 2024, he sees a "very large" deficit persisting for a number of years.

Huhn sees this situation pushing prices for uranium much higher, although he didn't give an exact number.

"The price isn't going to make sense for anybody," he said. "We can arguably go up another US$20 — that will arguably incentivize every project in the world to be profitable. But the price is going to go far beyond that simply driven by the substantially larger amount of demand than we have for supply."

In terms of which stocks to focus on, Huhn said since December small- and mid-cap companies have been outperforming larger-cap companies — he's tracking that movement via the Sprott Junior Uranium Miners ETF (NASDAQ:URNJ), which holds a basket of small- and mid-cap uranium stocks, and sector major Cameco (TSX:CCO,NYSE:CCJ).

"The main theory around this is that as the story gets more popular due to its relative performance and it starts to attract more investment attention, you're going to attract more retail investors, and the retail investors largely go after the smaller companies because they believe that there's torque in those companies. And there is torque in those smaller companies," he explained during the conversation. "Unfortunately, when risk is off, that torque is to the downside. When it's on they can outperform by orders of magnitude."

Watch the interview above for Huhn's full thoughts on the topics discussed above, as well his analysis of Cameco's latest results, contracting in the uranium space and why the sector doesn't need any more catalysts.

Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

Editorial Disclosure: The Investing News Network does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported in the interviews it conducts. The opinions expressed in these interviews do not reflect the opinions of the Investing News Network and do not constitute investment advice. All readers are encouraged to perform their own due diligence.

Additional information on uranium stock investing — FREE

Lobo Tiggre: Uranium Back on the Table, When Will Gold Stocks Move?

Speaking to the Investing News Network, Lobo Tiggre, CEO of IndependentSpeculator.com, shared his thoughts on uranium's recent price pullback and gold's new nominal all-time high.

"I'm putting uranium back on the table again. I'm actually as bullish again now on uranium as I am on gold for this year. I think both are going to do really well," he said at the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada (PDAC) convention.

Watch the interview for more from Tiggre on uranium and gold. You can also click here for our PDAC playlist.

Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

Affiliate Disclosure: The Investing News Network may earn commission from qualifying purchases or actions made through the links or advertisements on this page.

Additional information on uranium stock investing — FREE

Gwen Preston: Gold Gearing Up for Next Move, Safest Bets in Uranium

Speaking to the Investing News Network, Gwen Preston of Resource Maven shared her thoughts on gold in 2024, noting that the yellow metal should work for investors from the middle of the year onward.

"I think the next move up in gold is going to require the rate cut — we've had the expectation of the rate cut built into the price, that's why we've gone up to new highs," she said at the Vancouver Resource Investment Conference (VRIC). "But we're still really in that sideways trend ... I think actually breaking through it will require the rate cut."

Looking over to uranium, Preston said that although the price has moved substantially in recent months, the commodity's supply/demand dynamics are such that it could "easily" jump to US$140 per pound overnight.

In terms of supply, uranium has become a seller's market. While companies are working to bring new mines online and restart idled production, the process won't be quick. She sees some relief coming from hedge funds that bought uranium at low prices and are now ready to sell, but emphasized that the volumes they'll be able to provide will be small.

There's also the east/west divide in the sector. Preston noted that the US Senate is likely to approve a ban on Russian uranium imports — and if that happens, Russia will probably preemptively cut off sales of the material to the US.

"There just isn't supply ... despite a few little setbacks that maybe create a trading range for a little while here to stabilize this huge price run that we've seen, I think (the price) will still go higher. I'm very confident that the price is going to end 2024 higher than the insane price that it began the year at. Because it's not actually insane. It's a valid representation of the lack of this essential commodity that the utilities need," she explained during the conversation.

In Preston's view, the safest uranium stocks right now are those with growing US production — those include Uranium Energy (NYSEAMERICAN:UEC), enCore Energy (TSXV:EU,NASDAQ:EU) and Energy Fuels (TSX:EFR,NYSEAMERICAN:UUUU).

Watch the interview above for more from Preston on gold and uranium. You can also click here for the Investing News Network's full VRIC playlist on YouTube.

Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

Editorial Disclosure: Energy Fuels is a client of the Investing News Network. This article is not paid-for content.

The Investing News Network does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported in the interviews it conducts. The opinions expressed in these interviews do not reflect the opinions of the Investing News Network and do not constitute investment advice. All readers are encouraged to perform their own due diligence.

Additional information on uranium stock investing — FREE

Top 5 Canadian Uranium Stocks of 2024

The spot uranium price added 86.41 percent to its value in 2023 and started 2024 at US$90.98 per pound. By late January, prices for the energy commodity had rallied to a 17 year high of US$106.

However, as Q1 progressed, uranium saw some consolidation. By March 11, values had slipped below US$90 for the first time since late December. Even so, prices remain historically high, holding above US$85 as of April 10.

Uranium's sustained high values following years of underperformance underscore its positive supply and demand dynamics, which are improving as nuclear power becomes an important factor in the energy transition.

During an interview with the Investing News Network at the annual Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada convention in March, Scott Melbye of Uranium Energy (NYSEAMERICAN:UEC) and Uranium Royalty (TSX:URC,NASDAQ:UROY) expressed optimism about the current price trajectory for the energy fuel.

"There's nothing to keep uranium from going to US$150, US$200 in this environment," he said.

Below are the top uranium stocks on the TSX, TSXV and CSE by share price performance so far this year. All data was obtained on April 9, 2024, using TradingView’s stock screener, and all companies had market caps above C$10 million at the time. Read on to learn what factors have been moving their share prices.

1. District Metals (TSXV:DMX)

Year-to-date gain: 140.63 percent; market cap: C$41.8 million; share price: C$0.38

District Metals is an energy metals and polymetallic explorer and developer with a portfolio of nine assets, including five uranium projects in Sweden. It's currently focused on its Viken property, which hosts a uranium-vanadium deposit.

Historic estimates conducted in 2010 and 2014 peg the indicated resource at 43 million metric tons with an average grade 0.019 percent U3O8, with another 3 billion metric tons with an average grade 0.017 percent U3O8 in the inferred category. According to the company, Viken is one of the “world's largest in terms of uranium and vanadium mineral resources."

Shares of District spiked to a Q1 high of C$0.37 on March 11, shortly after the Swedish government announced plans to review a nation-wide ban on uranium mining and exploration that has been in place since 2018.

“We are very pleased with this official statement from the Swedish Government and believe it is a significant step towards lifting the current uranium mining moratorium in Sweden,” Garrett Ainsworth, CEO of District, said. “The Swedish Government has made its intentions clear by stating that ‘the current ban on uranium mining will be removed.’ District is ready for this transformational decision with our portfolio of properties in Sweden.”

Earlier in the quarter, the company completed the acquisition of the remaining four mineral licenses at Viken.

Company Profile

2. Greenridge Exploration (CSE:GXP)

Company Profile

Year-to-date gain: 78.72 percent; market cap: C$13.89 million; share price: C$0.84

Canada-focused Greenridge Exploration is currently engaged in the exploration of the Nut Lake uranium project in the Thelon Basin in Nunavut, Canada. The Nut Lake asset spans 4,036 hectares, and the company says it is strategically positioned near the Angilak uranium deposit, which was recently acquired by Atha Energy (TSXV:SASK,OTCQB:SASKF) through a three way merger with Latitude Uranium and 92 Energy.

Nut Lake is a new property for Greenridge — on January 18, the company entered into an option agreement with three parties to acquire a 100 percent stake in the asset. Historic drilling at the polymetallic deposit has identified “significant” uranium mineralization, with intersections of up to 9 feet containing 0.69 percent of U3O8.

On March 28, the uranium explorer announced the addition of Sean Hillacre to its advisory team. Hillacre, who is the president and vice president of exploration at Standard Uranium (TSXV:STND,OTCQB:STTDF), has more than 10 years of experience as a geologist in Saskatchewan's Athabasca Basin. Some of that time was spent on the technical team at NexGen Energy (TSX:NXE,NYSE:NXE,ASX:NXG) advancing the Arrow uranium deposit toward production.

Shares of Greenridge trended higher through Q1, reaching a high of C$0.78 for the period on March 31.

3. Myriad Uranium (CSE:M)

Year-to-date gain: 78.38 percent; market cap: C$11.27 million; share price: C$0.33

Exploration company Myriad Uranium holds a significant interest in two promising uranium projects. At Wyoming's Copper Mountain uranium project, in which it possesses a 75 percent earnable interest, the company is aiming to tap into the “world-class” potential of the district. The state is the US’ top producer of uranium.

Myriad also has an 80 percent stake in uranium exploration licenses comprising 1,800 square kilometers in Niger's Tim Mersoï Basin, another jurisdiction that boasts world-class uranium deposits.

Shares of Myriad registered a Q1 high early in the period, hitting C$0.39 on January 21. The share price bump coincided with news that the company was welcoming “renowned geologist and the pre-eminent authority on Copper Mountain and its uranium endowment” Jim Davis, to its technical committee.

Commenting on the appointment, Myriad CEO Thomas Lamb said, “On October 31, 2023, we announced historic resource estimates and resource targets relating to Copper Mountain. These estimates and targets were the product of C$100 million in exploration and development spends by Union Pacific during the 1970s. Much of this work was led by Jim Davis, and we are delighted he is joining our Technical Committee.”

Company Profile

4. CanAlaska Uranium (TSXV:CVV)

Year-to-date gain: 71.43 percent; market cap: C$98.61 million; share price: C$0.66

CanAlaska Uranium is a self-described project generator with a portfolio of assets in the Athabasca Basin. The region is well known in the sector for its high-grade deposits, which helped birth the moniker "the Saudi Arabia of Uranium."

The company's five asset portfolio includes the West McArthur property, which is situated near sector major Cameco (TSX:CCO,NYSE:CCJ) and Orano Canada’s McArthur River mine. In 2018, Cameco signed on as a joint venture partner for CanAlaska's project and the company retains a 16.65 percent stake.

The uranium explorer made several announcements over the 90 day period, including the approval of a C$7.5 million exploration program at West McArthur. On February 28, the company reported high-grade intersections at the Pike zone at West McArthur. The discovery was made during the exploration firm's winter drill campaign.

The statement drill hole, WMA082-4, intersected 13.75 percent U3O8 equivalent (eU3O8) over 16.8 meters, including 40.3 percent eU3O8 over 4.7 meters and 13.54 percent eU3O8 over 2 meters. CanAlaska’s share price jumped from C$0.46 on February 27 to C$0.74 the day of the news, and marked a Q1 high of C$0.75 on March 7.

Press Releases
Company Profile

5. Premier American Uranium (TSXV:PUR)

Year-to-date gain: 69.68 percent; market cap: C$41.45 million; share price: C$2.63

Premier American Uranium is focused on consolidating, exploring and developing uranium projects in the US. The company, which was spun out of Consolidated Uranium in late 2023, currently has four assets in two major uranium-producing jurisdictions: Wyoming's Great Divide Basin and Colorado's Uravan Mineral Belt.

On March 20, Premier announced plans to acquire American Future Fuel (OTCQB:AFFCF), which would give Premier access to the Cebolleta uranium project located within the Grants Mineral Belt of New Mexico.

The all-share deal will see the combined value of the merged companies sit at C$129 million.

“The announcement … marks a significant leap in our journey to strengthen our foothold in the US uranium market through opportunistic and strategic M&A,” said Tim Rotolo, chairman of Premier American Uranium. “By acquiring a key project, we’re not just enriching our portfolio; we’re also setting our roots in three principal uranium regions, paving the way for rapid growth.” Shares of Premier reached a quarterly high of C$3.09 on February 8.

Company Profile

FAQs for investing in uranium

What is uranium used for?

Uranium is primarily used for the production of nuclear energy, a form of clean energy created in nuclear power plants. In fact, 99 percent of uranium is used for this purpose. As of 2022, there were 439 active nuclear reactors, as per the International Atomic Energy Agency. Last year, 8 percent of US power came from nuclear energy.

The commodity is also used in the defense industry as a component of nuclear weaponry, among other uses. However, there are safeguards in effect to keep this to a minimum. To create weapons-grade uranium, the material has to be enriched significantly — above 90 percent — to the point that to achieve just 5.6 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium, it would require 1 metric ton of uranium pre-enrichment.

Because of this necessity, uranium enrichment facilities are closely monitored under international agreements. Uranium used for nuclear power production only needs to be enriched to 5 percent; nuclear enrichment facilities need special licenses to enrich above that point for uses such as research at 20 percent enrichment.

The metal is also used in the medical field for applications such as transmission electron microscopy. Before uranium was discovered to be radioactive, it was used to impart a yellow color to ceramic glazes and glass.

Where is uranium found?

The country with the greatest uranium reserves by far is Australia — the island nation holds 28 percent of the world’s uranium reserves. Rounding out the top three are Kazakhstan with 15 percent and Canada with 9 percent.

Although Australia has the highest reserves, it holds uranium as a low priority and is only fourth overall for production. All its uranium output is exported, with none used for domestic nuclear energy production.

Kazakhstan is the world’s largest producer of the metal, with production of 21,227 metric tons in 2022. The country’s national uranium company, Kazatomprom, is the world’s largest producer.

Canada’s uranium reserves are found primarily in its Athabasca Basin, and the region is a top producer of the metal as well, although some of the major mines have been under care and maintenance in recent years.

Why should I buy uranium stocks?

Investors should always do their own due diligence when looking at any commodity so that they can decide whether it fits into their investment plans. With that being said, many experts are convinced that uranium has entered into a significant bull market, meaning that uranium stocks could be a good buy.

A slew of factors have led to this bull market. While the uranium industry spent the last decade or so in a downturn following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, discourse has been building around the metal's use as a source of clean energy, which is important for countries looking to reach climate goals. Nations are now prioritizing a mix of clean energies such as solar and wind energy alongside nuclear. Significantly, in August 2022, Japan announced it is looking into restarting its idled nuclear power plants and commissioning new ones.

Uranium prices are very important to uranium miners, as in recent years levels have not been high enough for production to be economic. However, in 2024, prices spiked from the US$58 in August 2023 to a high of US$106 per pound U3O8 in February 2024. At this price level, uranium stocks remain highly undervalued.

Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!

Securities Disclosure: I, Georgia Williams, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

Additional information on uranium stock investing — FREE

Keep reading...Show less

Uranium Price Update: Q1 2024 in Review

Keep reading...Show less

Ur-Energy Announces Appointment of New Board Members: John Paul Pressey and Elmer W. Dyke

Ur-Energy Inc. (NYSE American:URG)(TSX:URE) (the "Company" or "Ur-Energy") is pleased to announce the appointment of John Paul Pressey and Elmer W. Dyke as new members of the Ur-Energy Board of Directors

Ur-Energy also announces the anticipated retirement of founding Director James M. Franklin and Director, and former President and CEO, W. William Boberg. Both will continue to serve the Board until the Company's Annual Meeting of Shareholders, June 6, 2024, though neither will stand for re-election at the Meeting. The Company is pleased that our new Board members will be able to benefit from this transition period prior to Dr. Franklin and Mr. Boberg's retirement from the Company.

News Provided by ACCESSWIRE via QuoteMedia

Keep reading...Show less

Denison Reports Results From Waterbury PEA, Including Base Case Pre-Tax NPV of $177M and IRR of +39.1%

2024 Uranium Outlook Report

Table of Contents:

A Sneak Peek At What The Insiders Are Saying

Who We Are

2024 Uranium Outlook Report

Table of Contents

Uranium Price Update: Q1 2024 in Review

Sulfuric acid shortage impeding supply growth

COP28 nuclear commitment supporting demand

Geopolitical risk and resource nationalism are price catalysts

Uranium price outlook remains positive

Justin Huhn: Uranium Price, Supply and Stocks in 2024 — Plus Cameco Analysis

Lobo Tiggre: Uranium Back on the Table, When Will Gold Stocks Move?

Gwen Preston: Gold Gearing Up for Next Move, Safest Bets in Uranium

Top 5 Canadian Uranium Stocks of 2024

1. District Metals (TSXV:DMX)

2. Greenridge Exploration (CSE:GXP)

3. Myriad Uranium (CSE:M)

4. CanAlaska Uranium (TSXV:CVV)

5. Premier American Uranium (TSXV:PUR)

FAQs for investing in uranium

What is uranium used for?

Where is uranium found?

Why should I buy uranium stocks?

Sulfuric acid shortage impeding supply growth

COP28 nuclear commitment supporting demand

Geopolitical risk and resource nationalism are price catalysts

Uranium price outlook remains positive

Overview

Company Highlights

Flagship Projects

The Moore Project

Russell Lake Uranium Project

Secondary Projects

Falcon Uranium Project

South Falcon East Uranium

East Preston

Preston

Hook Lake

Yurchison Lake

Mann Lake

Management Team

Jordan Trimble, B.Sc., CFA – President and CEO

Jim Pettit – Chairman of the Board

David Cates - Director

Joseph Gallucci - Director

Amanda Chow - Director

Dave Billard – Head Consulting Geologist

Christine McKechnie – Senior Project Geologist

Sean Cross – Project Geologist

Dylan Drummond – Project Geologist

Overview

Company Highlights

Key Projects

Walker Claims

Project Highlights:

Hare Hill Pluton

Project Highlights:

Management Team

Fraser Rieche - CEO and Director

Brian Crawford - CFO and Director

Michelle Suzuki - Director

Jordan Smith - Director

Karim Rayani – Strategic Advisor

Latest News

Latest Press Releases

Related News

TOP STOCKS