Hi Vintage, I generally agree with your assessment in regard to...

Hi Vintage, I generally agree with your assessment in regard to changes to the timeline being likely. However, at the risk of stating the obvious, I highlight the fact that PEN is looking to produce the fuel needed by reactors, not build or operate reactors (I kind of think that it is worth separating the two activities since the media seems totally confused about the difference).

From what I see in terms of the approaching likely supply shortfall for U, I can't see why the production of U would need, necessarily, to be interfered with too much - it is more likely to be the actual reactor building approval process that gets the lion's share of the scrutiny and consequent slow down as a result.

Given that PEN will be filling a shortfall in relation to existing reactors and will be a cheap competitor in the market, unless these existing reactors are going to be shut down would PEN not still be well placed to supply what the US is clearly going to need in a year or two.

We probably won't make as much profit in the short term but the business would still be quite viable from my reading.

I make all these observations on limited research so feel free to have a go on the issues raised - I live to learn.