No company operates in isolation. We are impacted by, and have an impact on, a multitude of environmental, social and economic entities and conditions. Here are a few to consider as you read our 2009 Annual Review.

1 – ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF URANIUM MINING TO SASKATCHEWAN

• Including contractors, Saskatchewan uranium mines employ about 2,600 people, half of whom are residents (primarily First Nations and Métis) of northern Saskatchewan.
• Including head office employees, Saskatchewan uranium mines directly employ about 3,500, and with spin-off jobs the industry employs over 10,000 residents of the province.
• Direct taxes and royalties from Saskatchewan uranium mining total about a quarter billion dollars annually. The same amount is also spent on salaries and benefits.
• Last year, about $350 million was invested in capital projects.

2 – DIFFERENT COUNTRY: DIFFERENT VIEW

• With 64 million people, France – a country somewhat smaller in area than Saskatchewan – has 58 nuclear power plants in operation, providing close to 80% of its electricity. The French people are quite accustomed to living with nuclear power, including the resulting benefits such as low electricity rates and low greenhouse gas production.
• France has one AREVA EPR™ reactor under construction and several more are planned.

3 – REACTOR CONSTRUCTION

• AREVA has built 98 of what are called Generation II reactors. Four EPR™ Generation III+ reactors are now under construction. They are the safest and most efficient in the world. For example, they use less fuel – and waste per kWh is reduced by about 30% (see the EPR Reactor).
• In total, 44 nuclear plants are under construction around the world and many more – 25 in the US alone – are proposed. This in turn is creating an increasing demand for skilled men and women in the industry, and future demand for uranium.

4 – MANAGING WASTE

• Spent reactor fuel comprises about 95% uranium and about 1% plutonium, which can be extracted to produce new fuel. As a result of AREVA’s fuel reprocessing, the total volume of France’s high-level nuclear waste is about the same as an Olympic-sized pool.
• Meanwhile, nuclear utilities, such as those in the United States and Canada, put aside sufficient funds into government hands for long-term management of the waste. This waste is not a burden to the taxpayers, nor is it a burden to the environment, because it does not disappear up a stack.

5 – CHOOSING SITES FOR NEW NUCLEAR PLANTS

• Communities that already have an existing nuclear plant are the most supportive, with a large majority of residents welcoming the prospect of new plants. This is at a time when it is almost impossible to site coal plants and liquid natural gas terminals in the more heavily populated parts of North America.