Cameco Corporation (CCJ) 2026 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Thank you for standing by. This is the conference operator. Welcome to the Cameco Corporation second-quarter 2026 results conference call. (Operator Instructions) The Q&A session will conclude at 9:00 AM Eastern Time.

感謝您耐心等候。我是本次電話會議的接線員。歡迎參加 Cameco Corporation 2026 年第二季業績電話會議。(接線員指示) 問答環節將於美東時間上午 9:00 結束。

I would now like to turn the conference over to Cory Kos, Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

現在我想把電話會議交給投資人關係副總裁 Cory Kos。請開始。

Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to Cameco's second-quarter 2026 conference call. I would like to acknowledge that we're speaking from our corporate office in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada, which is on Treaty 6 territory, the traditional territory of the Cree people and the homeland of the Metis.

謝謝，接線員，各位早安。歡迎參加 Cameco 2026 年第二季電話會議。我想先致意並說明，我們目前在加拿大薩斯喀徹溫省薩斯卡通的公司總部發言，該地位於第 6 號條約領土之上，是克里族的傳統領地，也是梅蒂斯人的家園。

With us on today's call are Tim Gitzel, Chief Executive Officer; Grant Isaac, President and Chief Operating Officer; Heidi Shockey, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Rachelle Girard, Senior Vice President and Chief Corporate Officer; and Dominic Kieran, Global Managing Director of Cameco UK. Tim will provide some commentary to start the call, and we will then open it up for your questions.

今天與會的有：執行長 Tim Gitzel；總裁兼營運長 Grant Isaac；資深副總裁兼財務長 Heidi Shockey；資深副總裁兼企業長 Rachelle Girard；以及 Cameco UK 全球董事總經理 Dominic Kieran。Tim 將先做一些開場說明，之後我們將開放各位提問。

Today's call will be approximately one hour, concluding at 9:00 AM Eastern Time. Our goal is always to be open and transparent with our communication. So if you do not have time to get into your questions during this call or if you would like to get into detailed financial modeling questions about the quarterly results, we'd be happy to respond and follow up to any inquiries.

今天的電話會議約一小時，將於美東時間上午 9:00 結束。我們的目標一向是以開放且透明的方式溝通。因此，如果您在本次電話會議中來不及提出問題，或希望就季度業績進行更深入的財務建模問題討論，我們很樂意回覆並追蹤任何詢問。

(Operator Instructions) For your reference, our quarterly investor handout is also available for download in a PDF file on our website at cameco.com. Today's conference call is open to all members of the investment community, including the media. (Operator Instructions)

(接線員指示) 供您參考，我們的季度投資人簡報亦可於 cameco.com 網站下載 PDF 檔。今天的電話會議對投資界所有成員開放，包括媒體。(接線員指示)

Please note that this conference call will include forward-looking information, which is based on our current assumptions, and actual results could differ materially. You should not rely on forward-looking statements, and we do not plan to update them after this call, except as required by law. For more information on the assumptions we've made and the risk factors involved, please see our most recent annual information form and MD&A.

請注意，本次電話會議將包含前瞻性資訊，該等資訊係基於我們目前的假設，實際結果可能存在重大差異。您不應依賴前瞻性陳述；除法律要求外，我們不計畫在本次電話會議後更新該等陳述。關於我們所作假設及相關風險因素的更多資訊，請參閱我們最新的年度資訊表（AIF）與管理階層討論與分析（MD&A）。

And with that, I will turn it over to Tim.

接下來，我把時間交給 Tim。

Well, thank you, Cory, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us to discuss Cameco's second-quarter and first-half 2026 results. While the year is flying by, it's the middle of summer here in Saskatchewan, Canada, which is really the inflection point where people here have stopped complaining about the past cold winter and they start worrying about the upcoming cold winter.

謝謝你，Cory，各位早安。感謝各位加入我們，一同討論 Cameco 2026 年第二季及上半年業績。雖然今年時間過得很快，但在加拿大薩斯喀徹溫省這裡正值盛夏，這其實是一個轉折點：大家不再抱怨剛過去的寒冬，開始擔心即將到來的寒冬。

As we move past the halfway point of the year, I want to start by reinforcing the consistent message you've heard from us for a while now. Our strategy is built for long-term value creation, and our decisions and activities will be centered around that strategy. As a result, we are currently on track with our expectations for the year.

隨著我們走過年度過半，我想先再次強調各位一段時間以來從我們這裡聽到的一貫訊息。我們的策略是為長期價值創造而打造，我們的決策與各項活動都將以該策略為核心。因此，我們目前的進度符合我們對今年的預期。

Year to date, we've seen the support for nuclear energy not only growing, but becoming more tangible. Around the world, governments, utilities, energy-intensive industries and the public are recognizing that nuclear energy is essential to energy security, national security, economic competitiveness and decarbonization objectives. We see that recognition translating into policy support, new build discussions, life extension decisions, uprates, fuel security initiatives and improved public perception.

今年迄今，我們看到對核能的支持不僅在成長，而且變得更具體。在全球範圍內，各國政府、公用事業、能源密集型產業以及大眾都逐漸認知到，核能對能源安全、國家安全、經濟競爭力以及去碳化目標至關重要。我們看到這種認知正轉化為政策支持、新建機組討論、延役決策、功率提升（uprates）、燃料安全倡議，以及更佳的公眾觀感。

Here in Canada, the federal government released its nuclear energy strategy in June. The strategy highlights the role that nuclear is expected to play in achieving national energy security and economic objectives while supporting emissions reduction.

在加拿大，聯邦政府於 6 月發布其核能策略。該策略強調核能預期將在達成國家能源安全與經濟目標方面扮演的角色，同時支持減排。

In the United States, the Department of Energy's conditional commitment to support deployment of AP1000 reactors is another very important indicator of the growing alignment between policy, proven and deployment-ready Gen 3+ technology and the need to execute. We've said many times that the next phase of nuclear growth will be defined by delivery.

在美國，能源部對支持 AP1000 反應爐部署所作出的有條件承諾，是政策、經驗證且可部署的第三代以上（Gen 3+）技術，以及執行需求之間日益一致的另一項非常重要指標。我們多次表示，核能成長的下一階段將由「交付」所定義。

Ambition matters, but execution is what brings megawatts into the grid and important to us at Cameco brings fuel requirements into the market. That's why we continue to believe that the value of proven technologies, experienced operators and established supply chains will be critical to the equation as the sector moves from aspiration to implementation.

雄心固然重要，但真正把兆瓦送入電網的，是執行；而對我們 Cameco 而言，執行也會把燃料需求帶入市場。因此，隨著產業從願景走向落地，我們仍然相信：經驗證的技術、具經驗的營運商，以及成熟的供應鏈，其價值將是關鍵要素。

For Cameco, that alignment is very constructive. We are positioned across the nuclear fuel cycle with Tier 1 uranium assets in stable jurisdictions, fuel services capabilities, strategic investments in Westinghouse and Global Laser Enrichment and strong long-term customer relationships built over decades.

對 Cameco 而言，這種一致性非常具有建設性。我們在核燃料循環各環節均有布局：在穩定司法管轄區擁有第一級（Tier 1）鈾資產、具備燃料服務能力、對 Westinghouse 與 Global Laser Enrichment 的策略性投資，以及數十年來建立的強健長期客戶關係。

On the uranium and fuel market side, conditions continued to improve in the first half of the year. The long-term uranium price strengthened to decade highs, and we saw increased on-market and off-market contracting activity. Customers continue to focus on security of supply with notable interest from both sovereign and commercial fuel buyers.

在鈾與燃料市場方面，今年上半年市場狀況持續改善。長期鈾價走強至十年高點，我們也看到市場內與市場外的簽約活動增加。客戶持續聚焦供應安全，主權與商業燃料買家皆展現出顯著興趣。

At the same time, our contracting discipline remains one of our key competitive advantages. We continue to be patient and selective in committing supply. We layer in volumes where we see contracts that support our strategy and where we believe we can incorporate an appropriate level of downside protection with exposure to improving future market conditions. That discipline matters because sustainable supply does not simply appear because demand is growing. It requires long-term contracts to back long-term investments planned by capable and experienced operators.

同時，我們的簽約紀律仍是我們的關鍵競爭優勢之一。我們在承諾供應方面持續保持耐心並審慎挑選。當我們看到合約能支持我們的策略，且我們相信能在保有對未來市場改善的曝險之同時，納入適當程度的下行保護時，我們才會逐步疊加（layer in）供應量。這種紀律之所以重要，是因為可持續的供應不會僅因需求成長就自然出現。它需要長期合約來支撐具能力且有經驗的營運商所規劃的長期投資。

Over the next five years, we have contracts in place for average annual deliveries of more than 28 million pounds of uranium per year. And as the market continues to improve, we expect to continue layering in volumes that capture greater future upside.

在未來五年，我們已簽訂合約，平均每年交付超過 2,800 萬磅鈾。隨著市場持續改善，我們預期將繼續逐步疊加供應量，以掌握更大的未來上行空間。

We continued on a positive contracting trajectory in Q2. However, quarterly results in our business will always reflect the normal variability of customer delivery schedules, product mix and the timing of activity across the fuel cycle.

我們在第二季延續了正向的簽約趨勢。然而，我們的季度業績一向會反映客戶交付時程、產品組合，以及燃料循環各環節活動時點的正常波動。

The second quarter of 2026 was no exception. Our financial results were lower than the strong second quarter and first half that we reported last year, largely because 2025 included a significant contribution from Westinghouse related to its participation in the Dukovany reactor construction project in the Czech Republic. But looking past the impact of that payment, the underlying fundamentals of our business remain strong.

2026 年第二季也不例外。我們的財務結果低於去年所報告的強勁第二季與上半年，主要原因是 2025 年包含 Westinghouse 因參與捷克杜科瓦尼（Dukovany）反應爐建造專案而帶來的一筆重大貢獻。但若排除該筆款項的影響，我們業務的基本面仍然強勁。

A few of our outlook metrics changed as a result of the strength of the US dollar, which drove a change to our exchange rate assumption. Average realized prices continue to improve in both our uranium and fuel services segments, and our annual production outlook is unchanged. The unchanged 2026 plan calling for our share of production to be between 19.5 million and 21.5 million pounds of U3O8 is important. That's because to date, in 2026, we've been reminded that safely operating complex, heavily regulated uranium mining and milling assets in remote Northern Saskatchewan is never without challenges.

由於美元走強，促使我們調整匯率假設，因此我們的部分展望指標有所變動。在鈾與燃料服務兩大部門，我們的平均實現價格持續改善，而我們的年度產量展望維持不變。2026 年計畫維持不變、預計我們應占產量介於 1,950 萬至 2,150 萬磅 U3O8，這一點很重要。因為截至目前在 2026 年，我們再次體會到：在偏遠的薩斯喀徹溫省北部，安全地營運複雜且高度受監管的鈾礦開採與選冶資產，從來都不會毫無挑戰。

Spring road conditions affected Northern supply routes during the quarter, contributing to temporary unplanned operational disruptions at Key Lake and McArthur River. And subsequent to quarter end, we also experienced operational challenges that had Cigar Lake production suspended for a couple of weeks. While we were able to address and overcome those unexpected developments with no impact on annual outlook, they were good reminders of why we have built flexibility into our supply strategy and why operating experience, risk management and credible teams matter so much in this industry.

本季春季道路狀況影響了北部供應路線，導致 Key Lake 與 McArthur River 出現暫時且非計畫性的營運中斷。此外，在季度結束後，我們也遭遇營運挑戰，使 Cigar Lake 的產量停擺了數週。雖然我們得以處理並克服這些意外狀況，且未影響全年展望，但這些事件再次提醒我們：為何我們在供應策略中建立彈性，以及為何營運經驗、風險管理與可信賴的團隊在這個產業如此重要。

Our assets are world-class, but they are by no means simple assets. They require disciplined planning, technical capability and constant attention to safety and reliability, and that's what our teams across the company bring to the table every day.

我們的資產屬於世界級，但絕非簡單的資產。它們需要嚴謹的規劃、技術能力，以及對安全與可靠性的持續關注，而這正是公司各地團隊每天所帶來的價值。

During the quarter, we closed our agreement to increase our ownership interest in the Cigar Lake mine. The high-grade Cigar Lake mine is one of the most important uranium mines in the world and increasing our interest reinforces our commitment to own and operate the scarce, proven Tier 1 assets that we expect will be essential in supporting the growth of nuclear energy.

本季期間，我們完成了提高在 Cigar Lake 礦山持股比例的協議。高品位的 Cigar Lake 礦山是全球最重要的鈾礦之一，提高我們的持股進一步強化了我們的承諾：持有並營運稀缺、已驗證的第一級（Tier 1）資產；我們預期這些資產將是支撐核能成長所不可或缺的。

In our Westinghouse segment, performance in the first half was strong, as I said, once you look past the benefit that we realized related to the Dukovany project last year. As an operating business with deep exposure across the nuclear power value chain, Westinghouse is embedded in the day-to-day needs of the global nuclear industry while also being well positioned to drive the next wave of new nuclear capacity through its AP1000, AP300 and eVinci technologies.

在我們的 Westinghouse 事業部，如我所說，若排除去年與 Dukovany 專案相關、我們所實現的利益影響，上半年表現依然強勁。作為一家在核電價值鏈各環節具有深度布局的營運型企業，Westinghouse 深入參與全球核能產業的日常需求，同時也具備良好定位，可透過其 AP1000、AP300 與 eVinci 技術推動下一波新增核能裝置容量。

New nuclear capacity creates long-term demand for uranium and conversion and fuel fabrication and related services. That's why Westinghouse is so strategically important to our broader growth thesis. It gives us exposure to the full nuclear fuel cycle and to the technologies that can help shape the next era of nuclear deployment.

新增核能裝置容量將帶來對鈾、轉換、燃料製造及相關服務的長期需求。這也是 Westinghouse 對我們整體成長論述而言具有高度策略重要性的原因。它讓我們得以布局完整的核燃料循環，以及能夠協助塑造下一個核能部署時代的技術。

So our message for the second half is straightforward. Our annual plan remains intact. The market continues to strengthen and Cameco's long-term strategic position is becoming even more compelling. We have flexible supply, a strong balance sheet, disciplined capital allocation and decades of experience operating assets in jurisdictions that customers can rely on. We believe the risk to supply continue to outweigh the risk to demand, and we are not prepared to dilute the value of our assets by committing supply into contracts that do not appropriately reflect the durability of market fundamentals.

因此，我們對下半年的訊息很明確。我們的年度計畫仍維持不變。市場持續走強，而 Cameco 的長期策略地位也愈發具吸引力。我們擁有具彈性的供應、強健的資產負債表、嚴謹的資本配置，以及在客戶可依賴的司法管轄區營運資產的數十年經驗。我們認為供應端風險仍持續大於需求端風險，我們不準備透過在未能適當反映市場基本面持久性的合約中承諾供應，來稀釋我們資產的價值。

With Tier 1 assets, strategic investments across the fuel and reactor life cycles, strong customer relationships and a proven operating track record, Cameco is uniquely positioned to support the continued growth of nuclear energy while creating sustainable long-term value for our shareholders, customers and communities. So thank you for your continued interest and support.

憑藉第一級（Tier 1）資產、橫跨燃料與反應爐生命週期的策略性投資、穩固的客戶關係，以及經驗證的營運實績，Cameco 具備獨特優勢，能在支持核能持續成長的同時，為股東、客戶與社區創造可持續的長期價值。因此，感謝各位持續的關注與支持。

Before moving to questions, I want to recognize Dominique Miniere, who has stepped down from Cameco's Board of Directors effective July 26, 2026, to focus on his other professional commitments. Mr. Miniere has served as a Director since 2023 and has been a member of the Human Resources and Compensation Committee, the Technical Committee and the Safety, Health and Environment Committee since he joined the Board.

在進入提問之前，我想特別致謝 Dominique Miniere；他已於 2026 年 7 月 26 日起辭去 Cameco 董事會董事職務，以專注於其其他專業承諾。Miniere 先生自 2023 年起擔任董事，並自加入董事會以來一直是人力資源與薪酬委員會、技術委員會，以及安全、健康與環境委員會的成員。

On behalf of the Board and management team, I want to thank Dominique for his contributions to Cameco, and we wish him continued success in his many pursuits.

我謹代表董事會與管理團隊，感謝 Dominique 對 Cameco 的貢獻，並祝福他在各項追求中持續成功。

So with that, operator, we are now ready to take questions.

那麼，接線員，我們現在準備開始接受提問。

(Operator Instructions) Brian Lee, Goldman Sachs.

(接線員指示) Brian Lee，高盛。

I appreciate a lot of this AP1000 pipeline disclosure in the MD&A so I wanted to ask first on that. Looking at this, it seems like the DOE process with the $17.5 billion loan funding from EDF, that's kind of toward the top of the stack in terms of timing potential.

我很感謝你們在 MD&A 中披露了許多 AP1000 管線的資訊，所以我想先就此提問。從這裡看起來，DOE 的流程以及來自 EDF 的 175 億美元貸款資金，從時程潛力來看似乎是最靠前的一項。

One, is that a fair characterization? And then two, can you describe kind of what milestones we could see on that process between now and, let's say, year-end? And then what kind of engagement you're seeing from the utilities since that was launched or announced a few months ago? And I had a follow-up.

第一，這樣的描述是否合理？第二，你們能否說明從現在到、比如說年底之前，我們在該流程上可能看到哪些里程碑？另外，自從幾個月前啟動或宣布以來，你們看到公用事業公司（utilities）方面有什麼樣的互動與參與？我還有一個追問。

Yeah. Thanks a lot, Brian, for your question. We have our Global Managing Director, Dominic Kieran, here with us this morning. So I'm going to pass it over to Dominic to say a few words about Westinghouse. Dominic?

好的。Brian，非常感謝你的提問。今天早上我們的全球常務董事 Dominic Kieran 也在現場。所以我先把時間交給 Dominic，請他就 Westinghouse 說幾句。Dominic？

Tim, thank you. Good morning, everybody on the call. So let me maybe just start with a comment that, as Tim mentioned, I'm very limited around what I can say about the offering that Brookfield -- that Westinghouse announced this morning. But Brian, let me get into your question.

Tim，謝謝你。各位與會者早安。我先簡單說明一下：如 Tim 所提，我能談及 Brookfield——也就是 Westinghouse 今早宣布的那項提案的內容非常有限。不過 Brian，我來回應你的問題。

So in June 2026, Westinghouse announced the USD17.5 billion conditional commitment from the Department of Energy, energy dominance financing team. And this is really to facilitate the ordering of AP1000 long-lead items. And why is this important? Because this is an opportunity to really accelerate the deployment of AP1000 in the US.

在 2026 年 6 月，Westinghouse 宣布已獲得美國能源部（Department of Energy）「能源主導融資團隊」提供的 175 億美元有條件承諾。這主要是為了促成 AP1000 長交期（long-lead）項目的下單。為什麼這很重要？因為這提供了一個機會，能夠真正加速 AP1000 在美國的部署。

So to your specific question around what are the next steps that you can see? Well, the next steps are that we will move to definitive agreements, and that is really the next step that you should be looking for is news from us about progressing to definitive agreements, which will involve, obviously, specific utilities in the US as well as the Department of Energy.

針對你問到的下一步會是什麼、你們可以看到哪些進展？下一步是推進至最終協議（definitive agreements），你們應該關注的就是我們在推進至最終協議方面的消息；這當然會涉及美國的特定公用事業公司，以及美國能源部。

Brian, I should have mentioned as well that Dominic, as probably everyone knows, is the Chair of the Westinghouse Board. So I just want to put that into context. Grant is on the Board, Heidi is on the Board as well.

Brian，我也應該補充說明，Dominic——我想大家都知道——是 Westinghouse 董事會主席。我只是想把這點放在脈絡中。Grant 也是董事會成員，Heidi 也同樣在董事會。

Yeah. I appreciate the sensitivity around the different constituents involved. Fair enough.

了解。我理解涉及不同利害關係方的敏感性。可以。

Second question, maybe just on the uranium segment. Pretty encouraging to see the realized uranium per pound ASP increased a good bit here. Curious, was that all because of the stronger market pricing? Or did that have anything to do with restructuring of contracts? And then how should we think about pricing the construct heading into next year?

第二個問題，可能是關於鈾業務部門。看到每磅鈾的已實現平均售價（ASP）明顯上升，令人相當鼓舞。我想了解，這是否完全是因為市場價格走強？還是也與合約重整有關？另外，對於明年在定價架構方面，我們應該如何看待？

I know heading into 2026, your view had been mostly flat. So it's nice to see this uptick halfway through the year. Would this maybe not also be the sort of baseline to expect for trend line heading into next year as well? Just any thoughts there.

我知道在進入 2026 年時，你們的看法多半是持平。所以很高興看到今年過半出現這樣的上行。這是否也可能成為我們對明年趨勢線的某種基準？想請你們分享一些看法。

Thanks. Grant?

謝謝。Grant？

Yeah. Brian, the uranium side of the market continues to move from strength to strength. Just in general, across the industry, I think what the most notable point to make is we are still not at replacement rate demand across the industry. We still don't have utilities coming forward and collectively buying at a volume that replaces what they consume under existing contracts.

好的。Brian，鈾市場持續愈走愈強。整體而言，就整個產業來看，我認為最值得指出的一點是：我們仍未達到全產業的替代率需求（replacement rate demand）。我們仍未看到公用事業公司站出來，並以整體合計的採購量去補足其在既有合約下所消耗的量。

And yet we found ourselves back into a mid-90s long-term uranium price on its way to three digits likely. And that's in the absence of replacement rate demand. And as I remind folks, we've never been at this kind of uranium price on the front end of a uranium contracting cycle. We've only ever found ourselves at these prices on the back end. So this is really super constructive for the uranium space that on very little demand, that underlying long-term price continues to go up.

然而，我們卻發現自己又回到了90年代中期的長期鈾價水準，而且很可能正朝三位數邁進。而這是在沒有達到替代率需求的情況下發生的。正如我常提醒大家的，我們從未在鈾合約簽訂週期的前段就處於這樣的鈾價水準。我們過去只在週期的後段才會出現這樣的價格。因此，對鈾產業而言，這其實是非常具建設性的：在需求很少的情況下，底層的長期價格仍持續上升。

And the reason for that is very simple. Utilities and those that are concerned about future production are starting to realize that they need to pay production economic prices to ensure that supply is there in the future. So that's a very good news story.

原因非常簡單。公用事業公司以及那些關注未來產量的人，開始意識到他們需要支付具備生產經濟性的價格，才能確保未來供應到位。所以這是一個非常正面的消息。

Now you spoke about our average realized price. Of course, that's derived from contracts we've already captured from business that we've already captured for deliveries that we're just simply making not new sales. And really, that increase in the price is a function of the contracts we're delivering into the stronger pricing in the market being reflected in the market-related components as well as some exchange rate effect, the strong US dollar relative to the Canadian dollar.

你剛才提到我們的平均已實現價格。當然，那是來自我們已經簽下的合約、已經取得的業務，對應的是我們目前只是履約交付、並非新銷售的部分。而且，價格上升主要是因為我們交付的合約中，市場走強的定價環境反映在與市場連動的組成項目上，另外也有匯率因素，也就是美元相對加幣走強。

But this is all part of our marketing strategy of being disciplined. Those old contracts are showing that upward leverage to the market that we said they would and new contracting going forward is being done in a very constructive, stronger pricing environment. And we're not even at replacement rate contracting yet. It's a very exciting segment.

但這一切都是我們秉持紀律的行銷策略的一部分。那些舊合約正如我們所說，展現出對市場的上行槓桿；而未來的新簽約則是在更具建設性、價格更強的環境中進行。而我們甚至還沒進入替代率簽約。這是一個非常令人振奮的領域。

Orest Wowkodaw, Scotiabank.

Orest Wowkodaw，豐業銀行（Scotiabank）。

A question around this disclosure around the Form S-1 with respect to potential IPO for Westinghouse. I realize there's not a lot you can say, but could you give us an idea of the strategic rationale for this? Is this -- sort of should we think about it as getting a market value for the business outside of Cameco and Brookfield? Or is this about not having to put cash into the business in order to fund all the growth that's ahead? Just curious how you're thinking about this.

我想問關於這份與Westinghouse潛在IPO相關、在Form S-1中的揭露。我知道你們能說的不多，但能否讓我們了解一下其策略性理由？我們是否應該把它視為讓該業務在Cameco與Brookfield之外取得一個市場估值？或者這是為了避免必須投入現金到該業務，以資助未來所有的成長？只是好奇你們是如何思考這件事的。

Yeah. Orest, consistent with the US SEC rules governing the process, we are extremely limited in what we can say about the offering at this time. So we just can't provide any additional information on that.

是的。Orest，依照美國證券交易委員會（SEC）規範該流程的規則，我們目前能談的內容非常有限。因此我們現在無法就此提供任何額外資訊。

Okay. Okay. Maybe shifting gears then. Grant, could you please give us an update just where current market terms are with respect to contracting in terms of floors and ceilings? And with the term price having perked up this year, just curious if we're also seeing ceilings move up in new contracts?

好的。好的。那我換個方向。Grant，你能否更新一下目前簽約市場條款，就地板價與天花板價而言大概到什麼程度？另外，今年期約價格有所回升，也想了解新合約的天花板價是否也在上移？

There continues to be upward movement in the floors and the ceilings, Certainly, as we look to respond to utilities, either on market or off-market, Orest, you're familiar, and I think most people listening are familiar that there's the two components of the term contracting market, what shows up in RFPs and then what shows up bilaterally or exclusively, and we call that off-market.

地板價與天花板價仍在持續上移。當然，當我們回應公用事業公司的需求時，不論是透過市場或非市場方式——Orest你很熟悉，我想多數聽眾也都熟悉——期約簽約市場有兩個組成部分：一是出現在RFP（招標/徵求提案）中的，另一是以雙邊或獨家方式進行的，我們稱之為非市場（off-market）。

From our perspective, when you look at this overwhelmingly favorable supply-demand dynamic where you have a very durable demand building over 3 billion pounds of uranium that needs to be bought to run reactors on a requirements basis against a supply stack that is actually increasingly uncertain, uncertain in terms of the depletion of existing assets, uncertain in terms of the restarts of existing assets that have been shut down and of course, promises of greenfield, which seem to be sliding sideways, if not backwards, that's all very favorable for that supply-demand dynamic.

從我們的角度來看，當你看到這種壓倒性有利的供需動態：需求端非常持久地累積，為了以需求基礎（requirements basis）運轉反應爐，需要購買超過30億磅的鈾；而供應堆疊（supply stack）卻愈來愈不確定——不確定性來自既有資產的枯竭、不確定性也來自已停產資產的重啟，當然還有綠地項目（greenfield）的承諾，看起來不是停滯橫盤，就是甚至在倒退——這些都使得供需動態非常有利。

And what it suggests is that there should be upward pressure on that pricing dynamic. And we just talked about it with respect to Brian's question on the underlying long-term price. Of course, when you think about market-related contracts, they don't reference the long-term price, but they generally have collars around them, floors and ceilings, as you've talked about.

而這意味著價格動態應該承受上行壓力。我們剛才在回應Brian關於底層長期價格的問題時也談到了。當然，當你想到與市場連動的合約，它們不會參考長期價格，但通常會設有區間（collar），也就是你提到的地板與天花板。

And we are seeing the floors and ceilings increase commensurate with that underlying long-term price. I think it's not unusual to see market-related contracts now where floor prices are in the high 70s escalated and where ceiling prices are 160 escalated.

而我們確實看到地板與天花板會隨著底層長期價格同步上升。現在看到與市場連動的合約並不罕見：地板價在70多美元高段並帶有遞增（escalated），天花板價則在160美元並帶有遞增。

I can't speak for everybody. There still seems to be some in the market willing to try to discount floors and ceilings in order to win business, but that's not what we do. We are in the business of being disciplined and looking forward to capture that long-term value with those utilities who have come to realize that security of supply is important.

我不能代表所有人發言。市場上似乎仍有人願意為了拿下業務而在地板與天花板上做折讓，但那不是我們的做法。我們的業務重點是保持紀律，並與那些已意識到供應安全重要性的公用事業公司合作，以掌握長期價值。

So as I said in my earlier answer, it is a very constructive uranium segment. And it hasn't even discovered replacement rate contracting yet. And that is something that I think everybody on this call and looking at the uranium space should be focused on. These are prices that we've never seen on the front end of a contracting cycle before.

所以如同我先前的回答，這是一個非常具建設性的鈾市場區段。而它甚至還沒有真正進入替代率簽約。我認為本次電話會議上的每個人，以及關注鈾產業的人，都應該聚焦在這一點。這些是在簽約週期前段我們從未見過的價格水準。

Alexander Pearce, BMO.

Alexander Pearce，BMO。

Great. So in the spirit of continuing to ask questions that you may not be able to answer, is it fair to assume that the timing of the filing -- or timing going forward, sorry, would probably -- the next step would come after finalization of the DOE and DSE agreements?

很好。延續繼續問一些你可能無法回答的問題：是否可以合理推測，這次申報的時點——或抱歉，未來的時程——下一步可能會在DOE與DSE協議最終敲定之後？

Alex, I have to go back again to our compliance with the SEC rules governing the process. We really can't say anything about that at this point.

Alex，我必須再次回到我們對SEC規範該流程之規則的遵循。我們目前確實無法就此多說。

Okay. I'll ask a more technical question then. So you pushed up cost guidance a little bit for this year. Is it possible to just break down how much of that cost change is due to kind of on-site maybe cost inflation, et cetera? Or is there any of the cost change just because of the purchases you've made this quarter?

好的。那我問一個更技術性的問題。你們把今年的成本指引稍微上調了。是否可以拆解一下，這次成本變動有多少是因為現場端的成本通膨之類的因素？或者成本變動是否有一部分只是因為你們本季所做的採購？

That's a good question that we can answer. I'm going to ask Heidi Shockey, our CFO, to answer that one.

這是個我們可以回答的好問題。我請我們的財務長Heidi Shockey來回答。

Alex, the change in the cost going forward was really as a result of the impact of the foreign exchange, mainly on our purchases, as you noted. So it's -- any inflation we're seeing and whatnot would have been covered by the range and the big difference was really that FX rate.

Alex，未來成本的變動主要是外匯影響所致，正如你提到的，主要反映在我們的採購上。所以——我們看到的任何通膨等因素，其實都已涵蓋在原先的區間之內；最大的差異確實是匯率。

Mohamed Sidibe, National.

Mohamed Sidibe，National。

Appreciate the additional color provided on Westinghouse and the outlook there. So maybe just on the new pipeline, our global AP1000 pipeline outlook or, call it, economics that you've shared with us with, call it, the better share of revenue there. I just -- I was wondering if the 91 reactors pipeline included opportunities that you would take on with the Koreans or if that excludes that category?

感謝你們就Westinghouse及其展望提供更多細節。那麼關於新的案源管線（pipeline），也就是你們分享過的全球AP1000案源管線展望，或者說其經濟性——你們提到那裡有較高的營收占比。我想確認一下：這個91座反應爐的管線是否包含你們會與韓國方面合作承接的機會，還是排除了那一類？

Dominic, do you want to answer that?

Dominic，你想回答那個問題嗎？

Yeah, of course. The pipeline, the 91 that we've sort of spelled out in our MD&A, is very specifically focused on deployment of just the AP1000 technology. So we have not included in that any opportunities related to the Koreans deploying their technology globally. So that is in addition to our list of 91.

是的，當然。我們在 MD&A 中已大致說明的那條管線，也就是那 91 個機會，係非常明確地聚焦於僅部署 AP1000 技術。因此，我們並未將任何與韓國方面在全球部署其技術相關的機會納入其中。所以，那些是額外加在我們這份 91 項清單之上的。

That's great. And maybe just a follow-up to that on the second question. When you disclosed the expected share of project value at 40% to 45%, is this something you expect to be consistently applied across jurisdictions? Or does it vary drastically between, call it, Europe, North America or maybe the Middle East?

太好了。另外針對第二個問題再追問一下。當你們揭露預期可取得的專案價值占比為 40% 到 45% 時，這是否是你們預期在各司法管轄區都能一致適用的比例？還是說在歐洲、北美或可能是中東等地區之間會有很大的差異？

Yeah, absolutely. Maybe let me just answer that with a little bit more detail around where we're at with the AP1000.

是的，完全同意。也許我可以就我們目前在 AP1000 的進展，多補充一些細節來回答。

So we talk a lot about EPC to build reactors, engineering, procurement, construction. Of course, were -- where really focused is on delivering a little bit of engineering that is site-specific engineering and the procurement of the parts to build the AP1000. So two comments on that, if I may. So firstly, we're very unique in that we have a finalized design for our reactor. And that allows us to have a very, very specific and fixed scope of procurement.

我們常談到以 EPC 方式建造反應爐，也就是工程、採購、施工。當然，我們真正聚焦的是提供一部分工程服務（也就是與場址相關的工程）以及採購用於建造 AP1000 的零組件。如果可以的話，我對此有兩點說明。第一，我們非常獨特，因為我們的反應爐設計已經定案。這使我們能夠有非常明確且固定的採購範疇。

So to answer your question, why we see real value and competitive advantage in the AP1000, is that there is no more design needed. And therefore, the procurement is fixed, which is the majority of that scope for Westinghouse that we've listed in the table. So in summary, we're expecting to see very similar percentages irrespective of what jurisdiction the AP1000 is deployed in.

因此，回答你的問題：我們之所以在 AP1000 上看到真正的價值與競爭優勢，是因為不再需要額外設計。因此，採購是固定的，而採購正是我們在表格中列示的西屋範疇中占比最大的部分。總結來說，無論 AP1000 部署於哪個司法管轄區，我們預期看到的占比都會非常相近。

Bob Brackett, Bernstein Research.

Bob Brackett，Bernstein Research。

Thanks for all the Westinghouse disclosure again in the MD&A. I'd like to dig into the backlog numbers and new order numbers that you disclosed. But I think of that backlog as the amount of business pre -2025 that sort of flows through in sort of 10 years and then becomes revenue and that, that new order line that you talked about there is a significant step-up, and that was business gained in 2025. And can you talk -- is that the new steady state for the level at which you're capturing business?

再次感謝你們在 MD&A 中對西屋的揭露。我想深入了解你們揭露的在手訂單（backlog）數字與新接訂單（new order）數字。不過我對在手訂單的理解是：那是 2025 年以前取得的業務量，會在大約 10 年內逐步轉化為收入；而你們提到的新接訂單那一行有顯著跳升，代表 2025 年取得的業務。你們能否談談——這是否會成為你們未來取得業務水準的新常態？

So Bob, thanks for the question. Just you may hear in the background of beeping noise. We're just hearing an alarm, but we'll carry on until further notice.

Bob，謝謝你的問題。你可能會在背景聽到嗶嗶聲。我們剛聽到警報，但在另行通知前我們會繼續進行。

So Dominic, over to you.

那 Dominic，交給你。

Yeah, absolutely. Bob, thanks for your question. So maybe let me do it in reverse order. Let me talk about new orders entered. So new orders entered, and this is a point in time at the end of last year, is the cumulative number of orders entered into within last year. Now those orders, some of those and the smaller percentage will have been executed and taken to revenue in the year. The larger percentage of those orders that have not been delivered on will enter backlog.

好的，當然。Bob，謝謝你的提問。那我也許倒過來回答。我先談新接訂單。新接訂單是指在去年年底那個時間點，去年全年累計簽入的訂單數。在這些訂單中，有一部分（占比較小）會在當年執行並轉為收入。而較大比例尚未交付的訂單，會進入在手訂單。

The backlog then is at a point in time of December 31, how much contracted business does Westinghouse have for delivery and revenue recognition in the future. So I hope that explains just what do we mean by backlog and new orders entered.

在手訂單則是以 12 月 31 日那個時間點來看，西屋有多少已簽約的業務，將在未來交付並進行收入認列。希望這能說明我們所謂在手訂單與新接訂單的意涵。

Your second question was then, are we expecting to see this as a steady state going forward? What I would just maybe just draw your attention to is, when you look at the list of AP1000 pipelines, the 91 identified opportunities for AP1000, you can see many of those are in the future, and we're at a pretty early stage with some of those projects. So while I can't give you any specific details on what we expect to happen to the backlog, I think what you can expect as we start to see the AP1000 being contracted and deployed, we are expecting to see a very positive trend on the backlog as we go forward through time.

你的第二個問題是：我們是否預期未來會呈現這樣的常態水準？我想請你注意的是，當你看 AP1000 的管線清單，也就是已識別的 91 個 AP1000 機會，你會看到其中許多是在未來，而且我們在部分專案上仍處於相當早期的階段。因此，雖然我無法提供任何關於我們預期在手訂單將如何變動的具體細節，但我認為你可以預期：隨著 AP1000 開始簽約並部署，我們預期在手訂單將隨時間推進呈現非常正向的趨勢。

Very clear. A quick follow-up on your nth-of-a-kind unit economics for the AP1000. You've got a range for a two-pack of USD14 billion to USD17 billion. Is that a conservative number? One could imagine that nth-of-a-kind economics could be lower than that $14 billion. How do you think about the range of outcomes of that number?

非常清楚。針對 AP1000 的「第 n 座同型機組」單位經濟性再快速追問一下。你們給出的兩座一組（two-pack）區間是 140 億至 170 億美元。這是偏保守的數字嗎？有人可能會想像，第 n 座同型機組的經濟性可能會低於 140 億美元。你們如何看待這個數字可能出現的結果區間？

Well, thank you for your question. I think the honest answer is it's pragmatic, right? We've given a range because it is pragmatic. And why am I being a little vague? Because some of this also depends on sort of jurisdiction.

謝謝你的問題。我想誠實的答案是：這是務實的估計，對吧？我們之所以給出一個區間，是因為這樣比較務實。那為什麼我說得有點含糊？因為其中一部分也取決於不同的司法管轄區。

So if we think about countries that are going to deploy multiple units, we're probably at the bottom end of that range. Where countries are maybe just deploying a single unit or a twin pack, we're probably towards the top end of that range. But as you say, at the moment, those are really estimates and depend on the situation. And I would say that is our best view at the moment of where we could get to.

如果我們考慮那些會部署多座機組的國家，我們可能會落在該區間的下緣。而對於可能只部署單座或一組兩座的國家，我們可能會更接近該區間的上緣。但如你所說，目前這些確實都只是估算，並取決於具體情況。我會說，這是我們目前對可能達到水準的最佳判斷。

Lawson Winder, Bank of America.

Lawson Winder，美國銀行。

I really appreciate the update and also echo those comments that I really appreciate the additional disclosure here on Westinghouse. When we look at the huge pipeline of 91 reactors, what percentage of those 91 units would you characterize as high probability opportunities?

我非常感謝這次更新，也呼應剛才的評論：我也非常感謝你們在西屋方面提供更多揭露。當我們看到 91 座反應爐這個龐大的管線時，你們會如何描述其中有多少比例屬於高機率的機會？

And then maybe being more specific on some of the different stages, like you have front-end engineering and design projects of around 11. If you look historically, what percentage of those more advanced discussions would typically convert to a full reactor build?

另外，若更具體談不同階段，例如你們有大約 11 個前端工程與設計（FEED）專案。從歷史經驗來看，這些較為深入的討論通常有多少比例會轉化為完整的反應爐建造案？

Dominic, please?

Dominic，麻煩你？

Yeah. Thank you. So Lawson, thank you for your question. We have ordered the [lest] in terms of how close the opportunities are to making what we call final investment decisions. And obviously, the closer you are to making a final investment decision, there's a couple of things to bear in mind, one of which is there's been considerable effort to get ready for a final investment decision. So a huge amount of work preparing for that. But obviously, the probability increases as you get to final investment decision.

好的。謝謝。Lawson，謝謝你的問題。我們已依照各項機會距離我們所稱的最終投資決策（final investment decision）有多近來排序這份清單。而且顯然，越接近最終投資決策，有幾點需要記住，其中之一是：為了準備最終投資決策，已投入相當多的努力。也就是為此做了大量準備工作。但顯然，越接近最終投資決策，機率就越高。

We haven't put specific probabilities on the list because, quite frankly, it's very, very difficult to estimate that. But let me make a couple of comments.

我們沒有在清單上標示具體機率，坦白說，這非常、非常難以估計。但我可以做幾點評論。

If we go to the bottom of the list, so maybe some of our early-stage opportunities that we've listed a number of countries there, it's not that we see them as lower probability, it's just that we see them slightly earlier in the process of getting to a final investment decision. And the countries that are listed there, we are seeing very, very strong recognition of the need for nuclear in baseload energy generation and some very, very common themes around the need for decarbonization, the need for energy security, the need for a decent proportion of baseload power on these countries' grids, which gives us really quite a high degree of confidence we will convert a significant number of these opportunities into real projects and pass through a positive final investment decision.

如果我們看清單的底部，也就是我們一些較早期的機會，我們在那裡列出了多個國家，這並不是因為我們認為它們的成功機率較低，而是因為我們認為它們在走向最終投資決策的流程中稍微更早一些。而在那裡列出的國家，我們看到對於核能在基載發電中的必要性有非常、非常強烈的認知，並且在去碳化的需求、能源安全的需求、以及這些國家電網需要相當比例的基載電力等方面，有一些非常、非常共通的主題；這讓我們對於能將其中相當多的機會轉化為實際專案並通過正向的最終投資決策，抱持相當高的信心。

So we're not really in a position to give specific numbers, but I hope that gives a little bit of color as to how we think about these opportunities.

因此我們目前並不真的能提供具體數字，但我希望這能讓大家對我們如何看待這些機會有一些更具體的理解。

Yeah. That is helpful, Dominic. And then AP300s and eVinci, again, the color there is very helpful. Obviously, a huge opportunity, particularly for the AP300. But just how would you characterize the CapEx remaining for Westinghouse internally and the timeline for each of those two technologies to get to a commercial deployment level?

是的。這很有幫助，Dominic。另外，關於 AP300 和 eVinci，你剛才提供的補充說明也很有幫助。顯然這是個巨大的機會，特別是對 AP300 而言。但你會如何描述 Westinghouse 內部在這兩項技術上尚需投入的資本支出（CapEx）以及各自達到商業化部署水準的時間表？

Yeah, absolutely. So let me start with the AP300. So just to be clear, what the AP300 is, is a scaled-down version of our very proven AP1000 technology. And while this is -- why do we think this is really unique and we're in a unique position is because we are basically taking the proven AP1000 technology and really just adapting it for those customers in those markets that are looking for a smaller reactor.

是的，當然。那我先從 AP300 開始。先說清楚，AP300 是我們非常成熟且已被驗證的 AP1000 技術的縮小版。而我們之所以認為這非常獨特、且我們處於獨特位置，是因為我們基本上是在採用已被驗證的 AP1000 技術，並且只是針對那些在市場上尋求較小型反應爐的客戶進行調整。

So what does that mean? That means the capital needed to bring that AP300 technology to a final design ready for deployment is actually pretty modest. And I think we've put the numbers in the MD&A. So they're there to read. I mean, thereafter, of course, once you're into deployment, it is our customers, our utilities, our government CapEx as we move into deployment of that.

那這代表什麼？這代表要把 AP300 技術推進到可部署的最終設計所需的資本其實相當有限。我想我們已在 MD&A 中提供了相關數字。所以大家可以在那裡閱讀。當然，之後一旦進入部署階段，隨著我們推進部署，資本支出將主要來自我們的客戶、我們的公用事業客戶以及政府端的 CapEx。

So I hope that explains the AP300. As I say, we benefit from very, very modest amounts of capital, I'd say, quite uniquely modest amounts of capital to finalize that design because of the pedigree of the AP1000. And I would just draw your attention to this is not just about design, this is about ensuring there is a robust supply chain for the delivery of these reactors. And of course, the AP300 has huge commonality with the AP1000 supply chain.

希望這能說明 AP300。如我所說，我們只需要非常、非常有限的資本——我會說是相當獨特地有限——就能完成該設計的定案，這得益於 AP1000 的技術傳承與成熟度。我也想提醒大家，這不僅僅是設計問題，還包括確保有一個強健的供應鏈來交付這些反應爐。而且 AP300 與 AP1000 的供應鏈具有高度共通性。

On eVinci, different technology. So this is what we call a Generation 4 technology. And we're really focusing the eVinci is a much smaller reactor. It isn't 1.1, 1.2 gigawatts, it's not 330 gigawatts. It's in the small number of megawatts range.

至於 eVinci，則是不同的技術。這是我們所稱的第四代（Generation 4）技術。我們目前對 eVinci 的重點聚焦在它是一種更小型的反應爐。它不是 1.1、1.2 吉瓦，也不是 330 吉瓦。它是在少數幾個兆瓦的範圍。

But we're very focused at the moment on some opportunities with the US government. And those opportunities currently are self-funding. And what this presents us with is an opportunity to make decisions in the future to commit capital to these projects, should we decide within our capital deployment process that they warrant additional capital.

但我們目前非常專注於一些與美國政府相關的機會。而這些機會目前是自籌資金（self-funding）的。這讓我們有機會在未來做出決策：如果我們在資本配置流程中判斷這些專案值得投入更多資本，我們就可以承諾投入資本到這些專案。

George Eadie, UBS.

George Eadie，瑞銀（UBS）。

Just firstly on the duration piece for the AP1000, how does last month's DOE commitment change things? Is that sort of brought forward timelines much? And is that included sort of thoroughly in the 9 to 10 and 10- to 11-year guidance estimate?

首先關於 AP1000 的工期部分，上個月 DOE 的承諾如何改變情況？是否把時間表大幅提前了？而這是否已完整納入你們所提供的 9 到 10 年以及 10 到 11 年的指引估計中？

Yeah, George, thank you. Good question. I mean, you will have read one of the purposes of last month's announcement is to really stand up the supply chain for AP1000 as it pertains to those items that are traditionally on the critical path. And so I think it's a very valid question, is this really provide an acceleration to these numbers.

是的，George，謝謝。問得很好。你應該也讀到，上個月公告的其中一個目的，是要真正建立 AP1000 的供應鏈，特別是針對那些傳統上位於關鍵路徑（critical path）上的項目。所以這確實是個很合理的問題：這是否真的能讓這些數字加速。

What we're really showing here in terms of the duration of the project, I think you can see that we've put in first projects, but also where we expect to get to with end of a kind. We are expecting the first projects to include the LLI timelines. But what we're expecting is very quickly to get to nth-of-a-kind, very much supported by the announcement of the long-lead item opportunity that we are working with the Department of Energy.

我們在這裡展示的專案工期，你可以看到我們同時列出了首批專案，以及我們預期在「同型多座」（nth-of-a-kind）時能達到的水準。我們預期首批專案會包含長交期項目（LLI）的時間。但我們預期能很快進入 nth-of-a-kind，而這也將在很大程度上受惠於我們與能源部（Department of Energy）合作推進的長交期項目機會之公告所帶來的支持。

Yeah. Okay. So I guess outside of sort of supply chain, what is the biggest headwind to getting this in production? Like is it labor and getting the sites ready?

是的。好的。那我想，除了供應鏈之外，讓這些進入量產/投產的最大阻力是什麼？例如是勞動力以及場址準備嗎？

I guess if I take the 29 units in the table, getting them all in operation in, say, 12 years from today, how confident are you that's still manageable given there's potentially another 60 in study in origination phase? I guess that's a huge profile of work to manage, but equally, the potential earnings are quite eye-watering.

我想如果以表格中的 29 座機組來看，要在從今天起算例如 12 年內讓它們全部投入運轉，你們有多大信心仍然可控？因為在起案/開發階段可能還有另外 60 座在研究中。我想這是非常龐大的工作量需要管理，但同時潛在獲利也相當驚人。

Dominic?

Dominic？

Yeah. Thank you. So maybe let's break the answer into a number of different buckets, if I may.

是的。謝謝。如果可以的話，我們把答案拆成幾個不同的面向來說明。

So bucket number one is go back to what I said earlier, do we have any design to do? Well, no, we have no design to do on the reactor. There is always some design to do around the sites. But because the design of the reactor is finished, the amount of design we need to do around the sites is not expected to be significant for this technology.

第一個面向是回到我先前說的：我們還需要做任何設計嗎？嗯，不需要，我們在反應爐本體上沒有任何設計工作要做。場址相關的設計總是會有一些。但因為反應爐設計已完成，我們預期針對場址所需的設計工作量，對這項技術而言不會很大。

The second bucket is, are we well positioned to provide the P, the procurement part of EPC? And the answer is yes, we are. We are very focused to make sure that we have the processes and the suppliers to stand behind the numbers that are on this table. And maybe just go back to my comments about the long-lead item opportunity in the US.

第二個面向是：我們是否已具備提供 EPC 中「P」（採購，procurement）部分的良好條件？答案是肯定的。我們非常專注於確保我們具備流程與供應商體系，以支撐這張表上的數字。也許再回到我對美國長交期項目機會的評論。

And then finally, we're into sort of construction. And you will see from the list and construction can be seen as a bottleneck. But you can see on the list that a number of these reactors are being deployed in different countries around the world. So we don't have, outside of the US, a lot of perceived bottlenecks around construction.

最後就是進入施工（construction）。從清單上你會看到，施工可能被視為一個瓶頸。但你也可以看到，清單中的多座反應爐將在全球不同國家部署。因此，除了美國之外，我們並不認為施工方面會有很多明顯的瓶頸。

So back then really just to sort of summarize your question is we have put this in because we have considered the sort of the risks around this. It is certainly not without risks, but we've been, we believe, prudent when we put this in as our view of what the potential future may look like.

所以回到你的問題，簡單總結就是：我們把這些納入，是因為我們已考量了相關風險。這當然不是沒有風險，但我們相信在提出這些作為我們對潛在未來樣貌的看法時，我們已經相當審慎。

Andrew Wong, RBC Capital Markets.

Andrew Wong，RBC 資本市場。

Just wanted to ask with the US DOE loan programs that are available for the long lead items, could that be combined in the future with the $80 billion initiative from the DOC? Because it looks like those two programs could be really complementary to each other.

我想請問，針對美國能源部（DOE）提供、用於長交期項目的貸款計畫，未來是否可能與商務部（DOC）的 800 億美元倡議結合？因為看起來這兩個計畫彼此之間可能非常互補。

Grant, do you want to take that?

Grant，你要回答這題嗎？

Yeah, Andrew, that's probably a question for the US government more than it is for us. At the moment, we treat them as two parallel projects. The DOE had a particular focus on standing up the American nuclear supply chain. That is the -- at the heart of the long-lead item program that Dominic had just explained.

是的，Andrew，這個問題可能更應該問美國政府，而不是問我們。目前，我們將它們視為兩個平行推進的專案。DOE 的特定重點在於建立美國的核能供應鏈。這正是 Dominic 剛剛解釋的長交期項目計畫的核心。

The Department of Commerce, you'll recall, was a different driver. That driver was to accelerate the deployment of AP1000s really by harnessing foreign direct investment pledged in the United States. Right now, they are different projects on different tracks. If they are combined, that would be under the direction of the US government.

你會記得，商務部的出發點不同。其驅動因素是透過運用承諾投資於美國的外國直接投資（FDI），來加速 AP1000 的部署。目前，它們是不同的專案、在不同的軌道上推進。若要合併，將由美國政府主導決定。

I guess the point is the reason it adds to 20 reactors is because the demand for baseload 24-hour carbon-free power is massive. And so combining them and only settling with 10 reactors would not even begin to satisfy the demand that the US government is seeing and trying to be in front of. So we'll watch it very closely. But at the moment, there are two separate programs run by two separate departments and both represent a very exciting opportunity for AP1000 as reflected in the updates that we put in the MD&A.

我想重點在於，之所以加總到 20 座反應爐，是因為對 24 小時、無碳的基載電力需求極為龐大。因此，即使把它們合併、最後只落在 10 座反應爐，也根本無法開始滿足美國政府所看到並試圖超前部署的需求。所以我們會非常密切地關注。但目前，這是由兩個不同部門運作的兩個獨立計畫，兩者都代表 AP1000 非常令人振奮的機會，這也反映在我們於 MD&A 中提供的更新。

Okay. For sure. Yeah. I mean I was just thinking complementary programs, so it's good to get to nth-of-a-kind as fast as possible with both programs that they work together. Regarding -- I want to ask about conversion --

好的。當然。是的。我的意思是，我只是把它想成互補的計畫，所以很高興能確認：為了盡快達到第 n 座同型機（nth-of-a-kind），兩個計畫能夠協同運作。關於——我想問一下轉換（conversion）——

Andrew, just on that point, Dominic made this reference and maybe we'll just put a finer point on it. Whether it's the DOE or the DOC moving forward or all of the programs that you see in the list of 91, it is essential to capture those three Ss that we've talked about.

Andrew，就你剛才那點，Dominic 提到過，我們也許把重點說得更明確一些。無論是 DOE 或 DOC 往前推進，或是你在那份 91 項清單中看到的所有計畫，關鍵都在於要掌握我們談過的三個 S。

We need to standardize and we've standardized to a common design. The AP1000 has a unique competitive advantage as articulated in the MD&A because it's design ready. It's fuel ready. It's licensed, it's regulatory ready, and it's been deployed. So the standardization has been checked.

我們需要標準化（standardize），而我們已經標準化到一個共同設計。如同在 MD&A 中所闡述，AP1000 具備獨特的競爭優勢，因為它是設計就緒（design ready）。燃料就緒（fuel ready）。已取得許可、法規就緒（regulatory ready），而且已經部署過。因此，標準化這一項已經完成。

I think what you were referring to was the second S, which is sequence. And it is important that you sequence properly so that these programs are complementary so that you're not standing up a skilled or a trade workforce, and they're all competing with each other at the same time. So standardized sequence.

我想你指的是第二個 S，也就是排序／序列（sequence）。而正確地安排推進順序很重要，讓這些計畫能彼此互補，避免你剛建立起熟練或技術工種的人力，結果所有計畫同時開工、彼此競爭同一批人。所以是「標準化」加上「有序推進」。

And of course, the third S we always talk about is simplify, which doesn't mean change the design. It means learn the lessons that have come before. And that is the key of good industrial practices to get to that nth-of-a-kind as quickly as possible.

當然，我們一直談的第三個 S 是簡化（simplify），但這不代表改變設計。而是要汲取過去的經驗教訓。這正是良好工業實務的關鍵，讓我們能盡快達到第 n 座同型機（nth-of-a-kind）。

So to your point, I agree with you. And I didn't -- I hope it didn't sound like I was dismissing it. They are complementary as long as we are standardizing sequencing and simplifying. The two programs are different. But if we follow those three Ss of good industrial practice, nobody needs to fear nuclear new build. In fact, we need to embrace it in a much more aggressive way than we have.

所以就你說的，我同意。我也希望我剛才聽起來不是在否定你的看法。只要我們做到標準化、有序推進與簡化，它們就是互補的。這兩個計畫確實不同。但如果我們遵循這三個 S 的良好工業實務，就沒有人需要害怕核能新建。事實上，我們需要以比過去更積極得多的方式去擁抱它。

Yeah, that's great. Much appreciated. And maybe just wanted to ask about actually conversion enrichment prices as well. that we've seen plans for new supply of both that's set to come on over the next, let's say, five years or so. But when we look at prices for conversion and enrichment, they haven't really come down even with the new supply announcement.

是的，這很好。非常感謝。另外也想請教一下轉換與濃縮（enrichment）價格。我們看到未來大概五年左右，兩者都有新增供給的計畫將陸續上線。但當我們看轉換與濃縮的價格時，即使有新增供給的宣布，價格似乎也沒有真正下來。

So I was just curious what you make of that? Why do you think that's the case? And what kind of takeaways would you say that, that could imply for the uranium market?

所以我想了解你怎麼看？你認為為什麼會這樣？以及你覺得這對鈾市場可能意味著哪些重點或啟示？

Grant?

Grant？

When we -- I think we've talked about a lot, but I'll just remind everybody on the call that you generally buy nuclear fuel backwards. You start with how many fuel bundles do you have? And if you need more, you then go to the fabricator to secure the service and then you go to the enricher, the converter and uranium.

我們——我想我們談過很多次了，但我提醒一下電話會議上的各位：一般而言，你購買核燃料是「倒著買」的。你會先從你有多少燃料組件（fuel bundles）開始。如果你需要更多，接著你會去找燃料製造商（fabricator）確保其服務，然後再去找濃縮商（enricher）、轉換商（converter）以及鈾。

And we've always talked about if you want to know where uranium is going, just look at what's happening downstream. And downstream, you're right in pointing out very strong pricing in fabrication, enrichment and conversion. And obviously, strong pricing brings the promise of new supply.

而我們一直說，如果你想知道鈾價會往哪裡走，只要看下游發生什麼事。而在下游，你指出得沒錯：燃料製造、濃縮與轉換的價格都非常強勁。而顯然，強勁的價格會帶來新增供給的承諾。

But I think what you're seeing in market pricing is the utilities themselves are being very clear-eyed about some of these promises. And so if it's an incumbent enricher, for example, doing an expansion at a brownfield facility, well, that's going to have a high probability of success. But when it's somebody who's never been in the business before with an unknown technology promising new supply, those tend to be doubted by the utilities that have to count on that and don't want to take on that risk.

但我認為你在市場定價中看到的是，公用事業（utilities）本身對這些承諾看得非常清楚、也更務實。因此，如果例如是一家既有的濃縮商在既有場址（brownfield facility）做擴產，那成功機率會很高。但如果是從未做過這門生意、用未知技術來承諾新增供給的新進者，公用事業往往會對此存疑，因為他們必須仰賴這些供給、也不想承擔那種風險。

So I think the fact that there's been a lot of announcements but prices remain strong is just simply as fuel buyers go into security of supply mode, they are going to be very clear-eyed about who's making those promises. They're going to look at their track record, and they're just going to discount some of those promises, especially the new ones on the conversion side. And those that are proven in the business will be the primary beneficiary of the higher prices that includes Cameco.

所以我認為，雖然宣布很多但價格仍然強勁，原因很簡單：當燃料買方進入供應安全（security of supply）模式時，他們會非常清楚是誰在做這些承諾。他們會看其過往紀錄，並且會對其中一些承諾打折，尤其是轉換端那些新的承諾。而在這個產業中已被證明可靠的業者，將會是高價格的主要受益者，其中也包括 Cameco。

Brian MacArthur, Raymond James.

Brian MacArthur，Raymond James。

And again, maybe it falls under the category you can't answer, but I just want to check that there's nothing changed in the partnership with the US government. If you do an IPO, they had an option, if they vested to participate in that IPO. Has any of that changed at the timing of these changes?

再一次，這可能屬於你不能回答的範疇，但我只是想確認：與美國政府的合作夥伴關係沒有任何改變。如果你們進行 IPO，他們曾有一個選擇權，若其權利歸屬（vested）即可參與該 IPO。在這些變動的時間點上，這方面有任何改變嗎？

I'll just open and then I'll pass it to Grant, but I'll just say that, of course, we're restricted from discussing this, but I tell you that we and Brookfield control Westinghouse today, and we don't expect that to change.

我先簡單說一下，然後再交給 Grant。不過我只能說，當然我們受限於不能討論這件事，但我可以告訴你：目前我們與 Brookfield 共同控制 Westinghouse，而我們不預期這會改變。

So Grant?

所以，Grant？

Brian, the only reminder is if you go back to that announcement about the partnership with the Department of Commerce from last fall, it had two important vesting conditions in it. And the first vesting condition was that it was the responsibility of the Department of Commerce to arrange financing of a minimum $80 billion to support the development of AP1000.

Brian，唯一要提醒的是，如果你回頭看去年秋天關於與商務部建立策略夥伴關係的那項公告，裡面有兩個重要的歸屬（vesting）條件。第一個歸屬條件是，商務部有責任安排至少800億美元的融資，以支持AP1000的開發。

So that has not changed. That would be the trigger that we would look for under that participation interest. That has not changed.

所以這一點沒有改變。那會是我們在該參與權益（participation interest）下會尋找的觸發條件。這一點沒有改變。

Yeah, that's sort of what I was trying to read through here, but I'll leave it at that. Second question, can I just make sure I'm understanding this chart right, which, again, thank you for all the Westinghouse information.

對，這大概就是我在這裡試著讀懂的內容，那我就先到這裡。第二個問題，我想確認我是否正確理解這張圖表；另外，再次感謝你們提供所有關於西屋（Westinghouse）的資訊。

But in simple terms, you talk about concrete minus three. It looks like you get 10% of the value on an AP1000, we're talking $8 billion. So let's call it, $800 million to Westinghouse, and then you get a margin of -- EBITDA margin of 20%. Is that -- am I reading the combination of those two charts properly. And again, I suspect those are averages, so it may be different on a reactor basis. Is that a fair comment?

但用最簡單的說法，你們提到混凝土前（T minus）三年。看起來你們在一座AP1000上取得10%的價值，我們談的是80億美元。所以就算它是8億美元給西屋，然後你們有—EBITDA利潤率20%。我這樣讀這兩張圖表的組合是否正確？而且我猜那是平均值，所以每座反應爐可能會不同。這樣說合理嗎？

Dominic?

Dominic？

Yeah, Brian, yeah, thanks for the question. So the way to read the chart is the total sort of cash flow spend, which if you refer to the table, we're saying for what we call a pair, a twin pack is between $20 billion and $26 billion. So that's the total spend. And you can see the difference there between effectively near-term build and nth-of-a-kind, reflecting the nth-of-a-kind, we incorporate all the learnings, which means we can go faster on the build, so a higher spend sooner.

是的，Brian，謝謝你的問題。讀這張圖表的方式是看總體的現金流支出；如果你參考表格，我們說所謂的一對（pair）、雙機組（twin pack）大約在200億到260億美元之間。那就是總支出。你也可以看到，近期建造與「第N座同型機組」（nth-of-a-kind）之間的差異；反映在第N座同型機組上，我們納入所有學習曲線的成果，代表我們可以更快建造，因此較早期就會有更高的支出。

So to that total spend, you then apply the Westinghouse share of that, which is circa the sort of 40% to 45%. And then to that, you apply the typical corporate EBITDA margins that we put on the table.

針對那個總支出，再套用西屋所占的份額，大約是40%到45%。然後在此基礎上，再套用我們在表格中列出的典型公司EBITDA利潤率。

Right. And then if I look at the next chart, where you show these lines, where it looks like if I just use not an an nth, a current one, it looks like at T minus 4, you have 0, if I'm reading this right. And then at T minus 2, looks like I get 20%. So I book 20% of that, if it's $8 billion for AP1000 near term. I'd book 20% of that in year T minus 3, if I'm reading the chart right, and then get a margin of 20% -- EBITDA margin of 20%.

了解。那如果我看下一張圖表，你們畫了這些線，看起來如果我用非第N座、也就是目前的案例，在T減4時是0（如果我讀得沒錯）。然後在T減2時，看起來是20%。所以如果AP1000近期案是80億美元，我會在T減3那一年認列其中的20%（如果我讀圖正確），然後再取得20%的利潤率—EBITDA利潤率20%。

Is that -- I get it, everything is going to be different within a plus or minus. Is that sort of the right way to combine those two charts?

也就是說—我理解每件事都會有正負差異。把這兩張圖表這樣合併理解，大致上是對的嗎？

Yeah. Broadly, it absolutely is. And I think what changes a little bit is how that 45% changes throughout the duration of the project. But on an aggregate level, I think your approach is correct.

是的。大體上確實如此。我想稍微會變動的是，那45%在專案期間各階段的分布方式。但就整體彙總層面而言，我認為你的理解是正確的。

Brian, I might just add that in the first five years, we get 50% of the revenue in the initial projects and then that speeds up, of course, as you get to nth-of-a-kind.

Brian，我補充一下：在前五年，初始專案我們會取得50%的營收，之後當你進入第N座同型機組時，當然會加快。

Right. That makes good sense. And then is that normalized adjusted EBITDA of 20%, is that kind of normalized over the whole cycle? Like in the first 50%, you'd be getting 20%? Or would you get like higher at the front end, get 30% and get 10% on the back end? Or can you even comment on that?

了解。這很合理。那你們所說的「常態化調整後EBITDA」20%，是指整個週期的常態化嗎？例如在前面那50%時，你們也會拿到20%？還是說前段會比較高，例如30%，後段10%？或者你們能評論一下嗎？

Probably can't comment on that. That's -- yeah. Just average over the whole project is about 20%.

可能無法評論那個。那個—是的。整個專案平均大約是20%。

Fair enough. And then on top of that, you get -- do they become operating plants at that time? Obviously, do in addition to that, do you get the $45 million to $60 million that you're talking about at the bottom of the table?

了解。然後在此之上，你們還會—那些在那個時間點就會成為營運中的電廠嗎？顯然，除此之外，你們是否還能拿到表格底部提到的4,500萬到6,000萬美元？

Yeah. Yeah, that's what that means. So once it goes into operation kind of on an annualized basis, we're looking at fuel, refueling, outage services and all that. And then it's kind of -- it flips into our core business, which is -- and that's just recurring opportunity for the core business ongoing.

是的。是的，那就是那個意思。所以一旦投入運轉，以年化基礎來看，我們會看燃料、換料、停機檢修服務等等。然後它就會—轉入我們的核心業務；而那就是核心業務持續性的經常性機會。

And Brian, just on that recurring core business, we're using our interchangeably. That table refers to Westinghouse's share of the core business. It does not refer to any Cameco uranium conversion and one day enrichment that would go into that core business. So that is just a Westinghouse contribution.

Brian，另外關於那個經常性的核心業務，我們在用詞上是交替使用「我們」。那張表指的是西屋在核心業務中的份額。它不包含Cameco的鈾轉換（conversion），以及未來某一天可能納入該核心業務的濃縮（enrichment）。所以那只是西屋的貢獻。

And then, of course, why we're putting such a shoulder into new build is because we want to create our own 80- to 100-year demand for Cameco's core business of uranium conversion and eventually enrichment as well.

當然，我們之所以如此大力推動新建案，是因為我們希望為Cameco的核心業務—鈾轉換，以及最終也包括濃縮—創造我們自己80到100年的需求。

Right. No, that makes sense too. That was going to be my next question. Great. Everybody will find these tables very, very helpful. I just want to make sure I'm reading it right.

了解。是的，這也說得通。那本來就是我的下一個問題。很好。大家會覺得這些表格非常、非常有幫助。我只是想確認我讀得正確。

Craig Hutchison, TD Cowen.

Craig Hutchison，TD Cowen。

Can I just ask where things stand with regards to the Department of Commerce strategic partnership? Like what's the next milestone that we should look for with regards to getting, I guess, a definitive agreement there?

我想請問一下，商務部策略夥伴關係目前進展到哪一步？例如，接下來我們應該關注的下一個里程碑是什麼，才能看到我想所謂的最終（definitive）協議？

Grant?

Grant？

Well, you'll recall, Craig, that we initially agreed to a binding term sheet with the Department of Commerce. And so while there is an effort to achieve definitive agreements, we still have a basis for moving forward on that program as the Department of Commerce envisioned it.

嗯，Craig，你會記得我們最初與商務部同意了一份具約束力的條款清單（binding term sheet）。因此，雖然我們確實在努力達成最終協議，但我們仍有一個基礎，可以依照商務部當初構想的方式推進該計畫。

So what's critical there is to find the right projects that match up the interest of the Department of Commerce, the interest of the United States government, in securing the 24-hour baseload power that will come from the AP1000 with those foreign investors who are interested and capable of investing in US-based projects.

所以關鍵在於找到合適的專案，能把商務部與美國政府在確保AP1000所提供的24小時基載電力方面的利益，與那些有興趣且有能力投資美國境內專案的外國投資人相匹配。

So we are free to move ahead and explore all those opportunities. That does not require the definitive agreement because it was a binding term sheet. And that work continues. So what you would watch for is any announcements with those who have pledged foreign direct investment in the United States and the Department of Commerce on moving projects forward.

因此我們可以自由地繼續推進並探索所有這些機會。這不需要最終協議，因為那是一份具約束力的條款清單。而這項工作仍在持續。所以你們可以關注的是：任何與已承諾對美國進行外國直接投資（FDI）者，以及商務部共同推動專案向前的相關公告。

And like a lot of things, a lot of work and a lot of thought is going into it. We just -- we don't have any projects to point to at the moment. But as I answered earlier, these continue to run in parallel, and we view them as separate projects at the moment for that reason.

而且就像很多事情一樣，這件事投入了大量的工作與思考。我們只是——目前沒有任何專案可以指出來。但如我先前回答的，這些工作會持續並行推進，而基於這個原因，我們目前將它們視為不同的專案。

Okay. Great. And just in terms of like potential for cost overruns, like is there a thought on how that would be kind of managed? And would there be any exposure from Westinghouse's perspective if there was cost overruns on new builds?

好的。很好。那就潛在的成本超支而言，是否有想法要如何管理？如果新建案發生成本超支，從西屋的角度會有任何曝險嗎？

The question of cost overruns has been, I think, if not the first, the second question, on the minds of utilities for a while now. But I think where the conversation is going is that there's actually a toolbox of investment tax credits, if there's still available production tax credits, as well as the reality that when you deploy an AP1000, you're deploying a reactor that's no longer first of a kind.

我認為，成本超支這個問題一直以來都是公用事業公司心中最先、或至少第二先想到的問題。但我認為目前對話的方向是：其實有一整套投資稅額抵免（investment tax credits）的工具箱，如果生產稅額抵免（production tax credits）仍可用也包括在內；再加上現實是，當你部署 AP1000 時，你部署的是一座不再是「首座同型」（first of a kind）的反應爐。

Yes, there's next of a kind, but it's no longer first of a kind. And as that design certainty and fuel certainty and license and regulatory certainty is combined with the standardized sequence and simplify the question about managing a project with a known product actually diminishes the conversation around cost overrun.

是的，這是「次座同型」（next of a kind），但已不再是「首座同型」。而當設計確定性、燃料確定性、許可與監管確定性，與標準化的施工順序結合後，對於以已知產品來管理專案的問題被簡化，實際上也就降低了對成本超支的討論。

It shifts it over to what is the package of tools that are available. I already mentioned things like investment tax credits, and then really, what is the confidence of those that are supplying long lead items as well as construction services in their own capabilities.

討論焦點會轉向：有哪些可用的工具組合。我已提到像投資稅額抵免這類工具；此外，還有供應長交期項目以及提供施工服務的供應商，對其自身能力的信心程度。

And ultimately, what we're seeing is very fruitful conversations that utilities realize if they go with first-of a-kind in a brand-new design, they're probably going to need cost overrun insurance. But if they go with an existing design that's already been deployed, then the tools are appropriate to manage those tail risks.

最終，我們看到非常有成果的對話：公用事業公司意識到，如果他們選擇全新設計的「首座同型」，很可能需要成本超支保險。但如果他們選擇已經部署過的既有設計，那麼現有工具就足以管理那些尾端風險（tail risks）。

So that's why the conversations are accelerating to ordering long lead items, and that's why you see a very robust list of 91 reactors from front-end engineering design close to FID all the way through to origination because it's just the reality of the competitive advantage of the AP1000. It's just it's diminishing the need to worry about first-of-a-kind tail risks.

因此，對話才會加速到下單長交期項目；也因此你會看到一份非常強勁的清單——共 91 座反應爐——從前端工程設計（FEED）接近最終投資決策（FID），一路到專案發起（origination），因為這就是 AP1000 競爭優勢的現實展現。它確實正在降低對「首座同型」尾端風險的擔憂需求。

Christopher Souther, Truist.

Christopher Souther，Truist。

Thanks so much for taking my question and all the disclosure here around Westinghouse. Could you talk a little bit around the project equity commitments that you and potential utility would be required to put up just like from a timing perspective, if we could marry that with the revenue chart that you gave?

非常感謝讓我提問，也感謝這裡所有關於西屋的揭露資訊。你能否談談你們與潛在公用事業公司在專案股權承諾（project equity commitments）方面需要投入多少——就時間點而言——如果我們能把這點和你提供的營收圖表結合起來看？

And just from a strategic standpoint, is the plan to own projects over the long term or monetize those over time? Like what would be kind of Westinghouse's plan around that?

另外從策略角度，你們的計畫是長期持有專案，還是會隨時間將其變現（monetize）？也就是說，西屋在這方面的規劃會是什麼？

I think you're referring to the Department of Energy program for the long-lead items?

我想你指的是能源部（Department of Energy）針對長交期項目的計畫？

Yeah. Exactly.

是的。沒錯。

Yeah. So each of those envision that you have something like five two-packs. Each two-pack has a special purpose vehicle that's put together, and it's a combination of equity in the form of the utility as well as Westinghouse. But for Westinghouse, it's actually -- it's margin that goes into that equity as opposed to putting cash in. So the owners and Westinghouse themselves don't intend to do that. That SPV exists until the utility is at FID and ready to commit to a build program and at which time it's sold forward to the relevant utility.

是的。所以每一個構想大概是五組「兩座機組」（two-packs）。每一組兩座機組都會成立一個特殊目的載體（SPV），其股權由公用事業公司以及西屋共同組成。但對西屋而言，實際上——投入到股權裡的是利潤（margin），而不是投入現金。因此，業主與西屋本身並不打算那樣做。該 SPV 會存在直到公用事業公司達到 FID 並準備承諾建造計畫，屆時再轉售（sold forward）給相關的公用事業公司。

It really is an acceleration. It's to take the traditional model where you have a utility who decides on nuclear, goes through a reactor selection process, decides on a technology, then starts all the front-end engineering and design, ultimately to lead to a final investment decision and then starts ordering long lead items. Well, if we did that, that's going to take a lot of time. In order to accelerate new build, we're trying to take the long lead item order and move it in front of FID and have a package of supply chain capabilities available.

這確實是一種加速。它是要把傳統模式——公用事業公司決定採用核能、進行反應爐選型流程、選定技術、開始所有前端工程與設計，最終導向最終投資決策，然後才開始下單長交期項目——加以改變。如果照那樣做，會花很多時間。為了加速新建案，我們試圖把長交期項目的下單提前到 FID 之前，並讓一套供應鏈能力的組合先行到位。

So it's just a -- it really is a shift in the normal way of building nuclear. And Westinghouse, we're happy to be involved in that because when you look at a global demand stack that we now count at 91 reactors, we're pretty confident that ordering long lead items is a really low-risk thing for us to do because there's going to be demand for those products when you have 91 that are being considered.

所以這就是——它確實是對核電建造常規方式的一種轉變。而西屋很樂意參與其中，因為當你看到我們現在統計的全球需求堆疊達到 91 座反應爐時，我們相當有信心：下單長交期項目對我們而言是一件風險很低的事，因為當有 91 座正在被考量時，這些產品一定會有需求。

Got it. Okay. So there's no equity role that you guys are looking at for like long-term ownership. That makes sense.

了解。好的。所以你們並沒有要在長期持有方面扮演任何股權角色。這很合理。

This concludes the question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Tim Gitzel for any closing remarks.

問答環節到此結束。我想把會議交回給 Tim Gitzel，請他做任何結語。

Okay. Thanks, operator, and thanks to everybody who is -- who are on the call today with us. We appreciate it. Cameco remains well placed, as you know, to support the next chapter of nuclear growth while protecting and extending the value of our assets for shareholders, customers and communities.

好的。謝謝主持人，也謝謝今天與我們一同參與電話會議的各位。我們非常感謝。如各位所知，Cameco 仍處於有利位置，能在支持核能成長下一篇章的同時，為股東、客戶與社區保護並延伸我們資產的價值。

So everybody, have a wonderful weekend, and enjoy the rest of the summer. Thanks.

祝大家週末愉快，也享受夏天剩下的時光。謝謝。

This brings to an end today's conference call. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating, and have a pleasant day.

今天的電話會議到此結束。您可以掛斷電話線。感謝您的參與，祝您有美好的一天。