Zimtu Capital Corp.: Canadian Uranium Exploration & The Athabasca Basin

TSXv:ZC / FSE:ZCT1 / www.zimtu.com

CONNECTING OPPORTUNITY AND YOU.

January 2014 / www.zimtu.com

TSXv: ZC

FSE: ZCT1

Canadian Uranium Exploration & The Athabasca Basin


DISCLAIMER

Disclaimers and Cautionary Statements. The information contained in this presentation is provided by Zimtu Capital Corp. (“Zimtu”) for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to issue or arrange to issue, or the solicitation of an offer to issue, securities of Zimtu or other financial products. The

information contained herein is not investment or financial product advice and is not intended to be used as the basis for making an investment decision.

The views, opinions and advice provided in this presentation reflect those of the individual presenters, and are provided for information purposes only. The

presentation has been prepared without taking into account the investment objectives, financial situation or particular needs of any particular person. No

representation or warranty, express or implied, is made as to the fairness, accuracy, completeness or correctness of the information, opinions and conclusions

contained in this presentation. To the maximum extent permitted by law, none of Zimtu nor its directors, officers, employees or agents, nor any other person

accepts any liability, including, without limitation, any liability arising out of fault or negligence, for any loss arising from the use of the information contained

in this presentation.

Except for statements of historical fact, this presentation contains certain “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable securities laws.

Forward-looking information is frequently characterized by words such as “plan”, “expect”, “project”, “intend”, “believe”, “anticipate”, “estimate” and other

similar words, or statements that certain events or conditions “may” or “will” occur. Forward-looking statements are based on the opinions and estimates of

management at the date the statements are made, and are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or

results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements, including, among others, Zimtu’s future growth and development, the

ability to create value through mineral property transactions, the proposed plans of any of Zimtu’s equity holdings, as well as those risk factors identified

in Zimtu’s Filing Statement dated July 25, 2008 and other disclosure documents available at www.sedar.com under Zimtu’s name. Zimtu undertakes no

obligation to update forward-looking information if circumstances or management’s estimates or opinions should change except as required by law. The reader

is cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

This presentation includes information provided to Zimtu Capital Corp. by each of the respective equity holdings (the “Third Party Information”). Zimtu believes

that all of these sources are reliable, but Zimtu has not independently verified any of this information and cannot guarantee its accuracy or completeness.

Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the Third Party Information and are directed to review the respective SEDAR filings of each company at

www.sedar.com.

This presentation does not constitute an offer of shares for sale in the United States or to any person that is, or is acting for the account or benefit of, any

U.S. person (as defined in Regulation S under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) (“U.S. Person”), or in any other

jurisdiction in which such an offer would be illegal. Zimtu’s shares have not been and will not be registered under the Securities Act.


No Place Like Home

Source: Luke Schuss


Introduction

Electricity Generating Capacity 15-yr CAGR (2010-2025) Institutional

forecasts Total electricity Nuclear

Renewables (ex-

hydro) Natural gas

US eia 2.6% 3.4% 3.7% 2.2%

BP 2.4% 1.4% 10.0% 2.2%

Exxon Mobil 2.0% 2.3% 5.6% 2.3%

Average 2.3% 2.4% 6.4% 2.2%

Talking Points

1. Electricity Demand – a seat at the table for

nuclear energy

2. The Commercial Nuclear Industry – future

outlook has everything coming up roses?

3. The Commercial Nuclear Industry – contenders

emerge

4. Reactor Builds – China is the major growth

driver

5. Zimtu’s Global Uranium Demand Projections –

scenario analysis

6. The Athabasca Basin – the ultimate winner and

why the region deserves your respect

7. Conclusion – Grade is King

Source: BP Statistical Review 2013

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012

Global Electricity Growth, 1985-2012

Electricity Generation

Nuclear


COMPANY

BUILDING

Private to Public

Global Nuclear Reactor Trends

PROJECT

GENERATION

Zimtu locates and acquires

mineral properties of

Merit and connects them

With public resource

companies

-15

-5

5

15

25

35

45Construction starts

Grid connections

Permanent shutdowns

Cancelled Constructions

Three Mile Island Chernobyl

Fukushima

Source: IAEA|PRIS


The Bright Future for Commercial Nuclear Energy

IEA Global Forecast Generating Capacity Required by 2035 (GW)

2010 2035 Required Increase

NPS* 450 S** NPS* 450 S**

Hydro 1027 1629 1803 59% 76%

Wind 195 1102 1685 465% 764%

Solar PV 28 499 901 1682% 3118%

Nuclear 393 633 865 61% 120%

Nuclear current capacity = 374GW

*New Policy Scenario (NPS) = IEA base case

** 450 Scenario (450 S) = probable achievement in reduction of global warming

OECD LCOE Ranges, 2010 (USD/MWh)

Technology* Discount rate

5% 10%

Nuclear 29-82 42-137

Wind, onshore 48-163 70-234

Gas** 67-105 76-120

Coal** 54-120 67-142

*Solar not included as sample population too small

**Includes carbon price of $30/tonne

Given a low discount rate,

nuclear is competitive with

other electricity generating

technologies using a

levelized cost comparison.

Nuclear Reactor Overview

Number of

reactors

Net Capacity

(GWe)

Net MW

per reactor

Operational 438 374 855

Under

construction 71 70 981

Permanent

Shutdown 147 55 375

Source: IEA/NEA/OECD

Source: IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2011 Source: IAEA|PRIS


Smooth Sailing Ahead

0

5

10

15

20

25 US 2012 Electricity Production Costs (cents per KWh)

Coal

Gas

Nuclear

Petroleum

OECD Overnight Construction Costs, 2010

Technology

Pre-financing

charges

(USD/kW)

Investment as share of total

costs* Construction

period (years) 5% 10%

Nuclear 1600-5900 60% 75% N/A

Wind 1900-3700 77% 87% 1-2

Gas 520-1800 12% 16% 2-3

*Investment includes financing but excludes future liabilities for clean-up

**Onshore

0

50

100

150

200

1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012

Te

raw

att

-ho

urs

Annual Nuclear Consumption

China

India

Korea

Russia

Source: IEA/NEA/OECD

Source: BP Statistical Review 2013 Source: Nuclear Energy Institute


0

100

200

300

400

500

Operable UnderConstruction

Planned Proposed

China US World ex US & China

Nuclear reactors and historic U3O8 spot price up to 2014

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

$160

Source: Cameco Source: IAEA|PRIS, WNA


Lurking Under the Surface

0

300

600

900

1977 1984 1991 1998 2005 2012

Te

raw

att

-ho

urs

Annual Nuclear Consumption USA

France

Japan

Germany

Largest Consumers of Nuclear Energy

2010 Peak Consumption

(corresponding to

left margin)

2012

World 2768 TWh World 2477 TWh

USA 30.7% 2010 USA 32.7%

France 15.5% 2005 France 17.2%

Japan 10.6% 1998 Russia 7.2%

Russia 6.2% 2012 Korea 6.1%

Korea 5.4% 2011 Germany 4.0%

Germany 5.1% 2001 China 3.9%

Canada 3.2% 2006 Canada 3.9%

Ukraine 3.2% 2007 Ukraine 3.9%

Four countries – the US, France, Japan, and

Russia represented 63% of total nuclear energy

consumption in 2010.

Uranium demand over the next 10 years will

be a function of the traditional “big 4” and a

new entrant – China Source: BP Statistical Review 2013


DISCOVERY

SPECULATION

DEVELOPMENT

INVESTMENT ANALYSIS

PRODUCTION

RE-VALUATION

USA, 100

France, 58

Japan*, 50

Russia, 3

3

Other, 197

Regional Breakdown of

Operational Reactors

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44

Gig

aw

att

s of

Cap

acit

y

Nu

mb

er

of

Reacto

rs

Age (Years)

Weighted-average Age of Reactors Worldwide

number of reactors

Total net electrical

generating capacity

Uranium Demand: age becoming material

Source: IAEA|PRIS


Energy Consumption: Nuclear vs Wind + Solar

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

nu

cle

ar

% o

f g

lab

al

ele

ctr

icit

y

TW

h

Nuclear Wind & Solar

Source: BP Statistical Review 2013


Reactor Constructions: Regional issues

Median Reactor Construction Duration

Reactor grid connections 1981-1995 Reactor grid connections 1996-2012

Number of reactors

Median construction duration (years)

Number of reactors

Median construction duration (years)

Korea 10 5.25 12 4.65

China 3 6.08 14 5.15

Japan 28 3.90 8 3.82

USA 48 11.43 1 N/A

Total 245 8.17 65 7.58

China, 28

Russia, 10

India, 6

Korea, 5

Other, 22

Reactors Under Construction, Regional Breakdown

Expected Reactor Connections to Grid

2013 2014 2015

Number of reactors 14 17 13

China 7 8 8

Actual 4 1 Source: IAEA|PRIS

Source: IAEA|PRIS

Source: WNA


Uranium Production Sensitivity Analysis

Base Case, 2040 Outlook

New grid

connections 198

Reactor

needs

Secondary

Supply

Mining

est.

permanent

shutdowns 119 million pounds of U3O8

Results 514 219 0 219

Additional U3O8 Production

Requirements 90

Growth 18% 28% -100% 46%

Best Case, 2040 Outlook

New grid

connections 294

Reactor

needs

Secondary

Supply

Mining

est.

permanent


Results 610 260 0 260

Additional U3O8 Production Requirements 131

Growth 40% 52% -100% 73%

Worst Case, 2040 Outlook

New grid

connections 198

Reactor

needs

Secondary

Supply

Mining

est.

permanent


Results 303 129 20 109

Additional U3O8 Production Requirements (41)

Growth -30% -24% -7% -27%

End of 2013 Number of

reactors

Median global

reactor

requirements

Supply from

downblend of

HEU

Mining

production

est.

million pounds of U3O8

Currently

Operable 435 171 21 150

The Athabasca Basin in Northern Saskatchewan, hosts the highest grade uranium deposits in the world and substantial existing infrastructure. This is an attractive proposition for uranium exploration.

Source: IEA’s WEO 2011 and ZC estimates


Spot price U3O8 and Canadian Uranium Exploration (millions of USD)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

We anticipate 2013 to be a trough for

Canadian uranium exploration

expenditures, rebounding strongly by

approximately 70% by 2018, following a

nominal price increase of 76% for uranium

Source: Cameco, NRC, Federal Reserve, and ZC estimates


The Athabasca Basin

Identified Resources of U3O8

Cost Ranges Adjusted for Mining Inflation per pound U3O8

< $18 < $36 < $59 < $117

Australia

-

3,508.1

4,319.8

4,520.5

Kazakhstan

123.2

1,263.0

1,635.5

2,131.0

Russia

-

144.0

1,266.6

1,690.6

Canada

912.0

1,083.6

1,218.5

1,597.3

Namibia

-

17.2

678.5

1,346.9

USA

-

101.7

539.2

1,227.4

Niger

14.3

14.3

1,094.5

1,158.2

World total

1,770.2

8,003.4

13,849.5

18,449.6

2013 expected global reactor requirements = 168.9 million pounds U3O8

Spot Price Estimates

Annual mean Zimtu

2013 39.74

2014 48.75

2015 54.03

2016 59.85

2017 65.74

2018 69.89

The Athabasca Basin is

the global low-cost

uranium supplier. The

Basin will profit from

exploration dollars

transitioning out of high

cost regions in Africa,

Kazakhstan, and

Australia. Source: OECD Uranium Red Book 2011 and ZC estimates


Conclusion: Grade is King

Supply of Uranium As Per The World Nuclear

Association Website

Very high-grade ore (Canada) - 20% U 200,000 ppm U

High-grade ore - 2% U, 20,000 ppm U

Low-grade ore - 0.1% U, 1,000 ppm U

Very low-grade ore* (Namibia) - 0.01% U 100 ppm U

Granite 3-5 ppm U

Sedimentary rock 2-3 ppm U

Earth's continental crust (av) 2.8 ppm U

Seawater 0.003 ppm U

Largest High Grade Mines in the World

Mine Average Grade U3O8

McArthur River 16.89%

Cigar Lake 18.30%

Athabasca Basin Sample Deposit

Depths

Projects Mean Approximate Depths

(meters)

McArthur River 530-640

Cigar Lake 410-450

Roughrider 225-350

Shea Creek 650-850

PLS 50-300

The Athabasca Basin is the global low-

cost uranium supplier. This competitive

advantage is extremely important and

will drive investment dollar to the

region.

Source: Cameco, Denison, Hathor, FCU

Source: Cameco

Source WNA


CONTACT 1450 – 789 W Pender St., Vancouver, BC V6C 1H2 / Toll-Free 1.877.377.6222 / Ph: 604.681.1568 / [email protected]

David Hodge President & Director

Ph: 604.681.1568 Ext. 223

[email protected] Vancouver, Canada

Sven Olsson Director

Ph: +49 7161 290 967 [email protected] Stuttgart, Germany

Sean Charland Director

Ph: 647.926.7326 [email protected] Toronto, Canada

Date post:	08-May-2015
Category:	Technology
Upload:	lakeland-resources-inc-tsxv-lk
View:	281 times
Download:	0 times