5 ms·

well, with nuclear you're (and in this case, we're) still dependent on uranium mines and all the equipment that's require to build and maintain those power plan

well, with nuclear you're (and in this case, we're) still dependent on uranium mines and all the equipment that's require to build and maintain those power plants, some of which might not be manufactured in the countries

mlyle 5y ago
That may be a problem in the long term, but there's not some spigot of gas you can turn off and cause an immediate problem.
- Sanzig 5y ago
  Uranium is also much easier to trasport than gas thanks to the ridiculously high energy density of uranium. Reactor grade uranium has an energy density of about 3,500,000 MJ/kg in a light water reactor, whereas natural gas is about 55 MJ/kg - so uranium is about 64,000 times more energy dense on a per kilo basis. You don't need pipelines or fancy LNG terminals, either - it's pretty easy to transport in relatively unexciting bulk containers. So, once the security concerns are addressed, you can buy uranium from any country willing to sell it to you and ship it. The number two and number three producers of uranium worldwide are Canada and Australia, both of which France is very friendly with (a submarine kerfuffle with the latter notwithstanding).
  - mlyle 5y ago
    Sure, and France reprocesses, too, which aids fuel security. Of course, this doesn't mean they control the entire supply chain for needed parts for nuclear-- but if some critical piece broke they wouldn't have no energy immediately, either.
throw0101a 5y ago
The top four producers of uranium (per tonnage) are Kazakhstan, Australia, Namibia, Canada: * https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/mining-of-uranium/world-uranium-mining-production.aspx https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu... Better than being dependent on oil and gas, especially if your current supplier is Russia.
- TrapLord_Rhodo 5y ago
  uranium doesn't matter, its fairly common. It's enriching that uranium that is held closley and is considered the 'Hard' part. Fun fact; This was the key measure in obamas iran deal. The US would give them the enriched uranium if they shut down their nuclear research.
imnotlost 5y ago
Dependencies are a fact of life. Question is, does Europe really want to depend on journalist/dissident-murdering Russia?
- galangalalgol 5y ago
  It is even in Russia's best interest to ne encouraged to diversify their economy before they simply run out of natural resources. If there is a steady decrease in the sale price of fossil fuels instead of a sudden one they will have more time to adapt right?
  - FredPret 5y ago
    I don't think that's really a worry (running out of resources). Our deepest mines are a paltry 4km; forests can be managed. Oil, gas, and coal will eventually run out, but the prices will have by then have risen to the point that use at scale will be impractical.
  - jurip 5y ago
    Those natural resources will last longer than Putin and his friends will be around.
Terry_Roll 5y ago
The largest uranium fuel depot in the world is Chernobyl, Ukraine. Russia nearly bankrupted itself when it contained the nuclear disaster and even Gorbachev thinks it was Chernobyl that ultimately destroyed the Soviet Union. Now with this in mind, I wouldnt be surprised considering the sanctions on Russia, if they perhaps make a grab for the uranium in Chernobyl and sell it, to claw back some of the costs they incurred for cleaning up Chernobyl. Strategically, it was useful for Russian politics to have something as risky as the Chernobyl nuke power station in the Ukraine during the soviet union era, ie different country if anything went wrong nothing to do with us sort of thing. However thats how it remains until now where the Iranians need uranium after their enrichers were destroyed with Stuxnet, so you have one potential customer there, you also have India & Pakistan, Israel as well as the UK and France who will all be needing a bit more uranium as we get off fossil fuels to reduce greenhouse gases.
- skhr0680 5y ago
  > Strategically, it was useful for Russian politics to have something as risky as the Chernobyl nuke power station in the Ukraine during the soviet union era, ie different country if anything went wrong nothing to do with us sort of thing. The same type of reactor as Chernobyl is still in operation at the Leningrad NPP
  - Terry_Roll 5y ago
    It would appear that some countries also view nuke power stations like offensive firewalls, that's the Baltic sea nations captured in some respect. Germany's car industry and Russian Oil wealth is also a partnership I see.
  - djcapelis 5y ago
    > The same type of reactor as Chernobyl is still in operation at the Leningrad NPP Along with three units each in Kursk and Smolensk NPPs. Plus I think a lot of people don't realize some of the other reactor units at Chernobyl continued operating until the last one finally shut down in 2000.
  - arcticbull 5y ago

mlyle 5y ago

That may be a problem in the long term, but there's not some spigot of gas you can turn off and cause an immediate problem.

Sanzig 5y ago
Uranium is also much easier to trasport than gas thanks to the ridiculously high energy density of uranium. Reactor grade uranium has an energy density of about 3,500,000 MJ/kg in a light water reactor, whereas natural gas is about 55 MJ/kg - so uranium is about 64,000 times more energy dense on a per kilo basis. You don't need pipelines or fancy LNG terminals, either - it's pretty easy to transport in relatively unexciting bulk containers. So, once the security concerns are addressed, you can buy uranium from any country willing to sell it to you and ship it. The number two and number three producers of uranium worldwide are Canada and Australia, both of which France is very friendly with (a submarine kerfuffle with the latter notwithstanding).
- mlyle 5y ago
  Sure, and France reprocesses, too, which aids fuel security. Of course, this doesn't mean they control the entire supply chain for needed parts for nuclear-- but if some critical piece broke they wouldn't have no energy immediately, either.

throw0101a 5y ago

The top four producers of uranium (per tonnage) are Kazakhstan, Australia, Namibia, Canada: * https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/mining-of-uranium/world-uranium-mining-production.aspx https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu... Better than being dependent on oil and gas, especially if your current supplier is Russia.

TrapLord_Rhodo 5y ago
uranium doesn't matter, its fairly common. It's enriching that uranium that is held closley and is considered the 'Hard' part. Fun fact; This was the key measure in obamas iran deal. The US would give them the enriched uranium if they shut down their nuclear research.

imnotlost 5y ago

Dependencies are a fact of life. Question is, does Europe really want to depend on journalist/dissident-murdering Russia?

galangalalgol 5y ago
It is even in Russia's best interest to ne encouraged to diversify their economy before they simply run out of natural resources. If there is a steady decrease in the sale price of fossil fuels instead of a sudden one they will have more time to adapt right?
- FredPret 5y ago
  I don't think that's really a worry (running out of resources). Our deepest mines are a paltry 4km; forests can be managed. Oil, gas, and coal will eventually run out, but the prices will have by then have risen to the point that use at scale will be impractical.
- jurip 5y ago
  Those natural resources will last longer than Putin and his friends will be around.

Terry_Roll 5y ago

The largest uranium fuel depot in the world is Chernobyl, Ukraine. Russia nearly bankrupted itself when it contained the nuclear disaster and even Gorbachev thinks it was Chernobyl that ultimately destroyed the Soviet Union. Now with this in mind, I wouldnt be surprised considering the sanctions on Russia, if they perhaps make a grab for the uranium in Chernobyl and sell it, to claw back some of the costs they incurred for cleaning up Chernobyl. Strategically, it was useful for Russian politics to have something as risky as the Chernobyl nuke power station in the Ukraine during the soviet union era, ie different country if anything went wrong nothing to do with us sort of thing. However thats how it remains until now where the Iranians need uranium after their enrichers were destroyed with Stuxnet, so you have one potential customer there, you also have India & Pakistan, Israel as well as the UK and France who will all be needing a bit more uranium as we get off fossil fuels to reduce greenhouse gases.

skhr0680 5y ago
> Strategically, it was useful for Russian politics to have something as risky as the Chernobyl nuke power station in the Ukraine during the soviet union era, ie different country if anything went wrong nothing to do with us sort of thing. The same type of reactor as Chernobyl is still in operation at the Leningrad NPP
- Terry_Roll 5y ago
  It would appear that some countries also view nuke power stations like offensive firewalls, that's the Baltic sea nations captured in some respect. Germany's car industry and Russian Oil wealth is also a partnership I see.
- djcapelis 5y ago
  > The same type of reactor as Chernobyl is still in operation at the Leningrad NPP Along with three units each in Kursk and Smolensk NPPs. Plus I think a lot of people don't realize some of the other reactor units at Chernobyl continued operating until the last one finally shut down in 2000.
- arcticbull 5y ago