54 ms·

Digging out uranium contaminates the land around the dig? You bet your ass it does. I wouldn't want to live within a hundred miles, but at least we only really

Digging out uranium contaminates the land around the dig? You bet your ass it does. I wouldn't want to live within a hundred miles, but at least we only really need one such dig site for the planet. Economics being what it is, there are more, but not a lot. Now go look at a coal mine, and multiply the damage that does by the number of mines. We can't eliminate all damage. We can minimize it, for which nuclear power is helpful.

Ras_ 13y ago
You don't always have to specifically dig uranium. Plenty of other mining products produce a side stream of uranium, which can be utilized. In larger picture these side streams don't matter much. What happens in Kazakhstan's (36% of all U production), Canada's and Australia's uranium mines does. They account for 64% of global uranium production. Australia has 23% of the world's uranium deposits, CAN 12%, KAZ 10%. About 85% of current needs are met with digging, 15% comes from secondary sources. It's interesting that two of the biggest producers of uranium do not utilize nuclear energy themselves. Even Canada produces only 12% of their electricity with nukes (France 78%). Good business even if you don't personally believe in it?