Publisher's Note: Mr. James Dines is a legend whose insight has been proven time and time again.
One of those insights was a very early bullish call on investing in uranium, making Mr. Dines "The Original Uranium Bug." Today we bring you an excerpt of The Dines Letter discussing it.
To your wealth,
Nick HodgePublisher, Outsider Club
Implacable, adj. Not to be appeased without a large sum of money.
Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
The Dines Letter dared to become "The Original Uranium Bug" when it was an even more deeply unpopular recommendation than it is these days, with a Major "Buy" signal on uranium at $8/lb (see chart below). In one of our historic calls, its price subsequently soared 1,650% to as high as $135, and many uranium stocks soared by far higher percentages, providing a slice of an opportunity to make a "killing."
Atomic power is implacably hated because it leaves toxic waste after having been used, while solar and wind power do not. That is the truth. But solar and wind, with all their good growth ahead, cannot replace oil, natural gas, or coal worldwide in time. Our planet's temperature is already rising.
Please recall our old, unlikely-looking prediction that the anti-nuclear power movement would actually boost atomic power as a dependable input of carbon-free energy. In fact, it's already begun and will continue to spread.
There is an insolubly deep disagreement about whether global warming is a natural cycle that is of little concern, or a one-way path to melting ice caps and a flooded world. Both sides can at times be in the Low State of Hyperneeding to Be Right. The topic has become a political debate instead of a problem to be solved. Instead of politics, let's stick to facts on which both sides could agree: we have an imperfect solution.
It is a fact that the planet is warming, and that we can't dare to gamble with our only planet. It is also a fact that humanity has simply not coughed up the trillions of dollars needed to replace coal with solar, wind, geothermal, etc. Nor is it likely to do so in time to make a difference. President Trump prominently favors cheap coal, but honestly, we are sometimes uncertain if he really believes something, or is just negotiating. As it stands now, America would pay the bulk of the cost to address climate change, while China would give very little until 2030, and who knows if anything would actually change then. Trump is in heavy-duty negotiations with China on trade issues now and will get China to pay back more of its current share, after which we predict Trump will become "green." Although we doubt anyone would believe that haruspication yet.
Solar and wind produce energy without creating pollution. It takes a lot of nerve to state this, but the truth is that atomic power is equally as clean as solar and wind! The objections to atomic are two. One, the atomic residue is lethal, although it could safely be stored five miles deep. And two, atomic power plants are dangerous. But so is alternating current, and it is the world's primary power source. JP Morgan backed Edison's direct current, while Westinghouse and Tesla instead preferred alternating current - the latter more dangerous, but cheaper and better over long distances. Alternating current won the contest, so it was made safer, to avoid accidental electrocutions. The same argument could therefore be made about the risks of atomic energy plants.