.41Dave said:
Shortages of uranium could get so bad that it could precipitate a war between rivalling nations and then prices could hit unheard of levels. QUOTE]
Sorry, that's not a funny joke. Try again. Not even considering this statement as an analogy for the mainstream impression of our oil supply issues, it's a weak statement.
Uranium is one of the more common rare earths, and easily accessible supplies are available throughout the world.
The current mines are not operating at full capacity, and only pulling out what is (relatively) easily processed.
The reserve mines are far, far more in number than the active mines, and more are being found all the time.
To put it bluntly, we won't have to worry about Uranium running out, ever. In fact I would put the 'Uranium is running out' concept right up there with that 'peak oil' bovine excrement.
Could you imagine the absolute chaos such an event would cause in the worlds armed forces? No more nuclear reactors for subs or carriers, no more fissile material for nuclear weapons, no more DU rounds... And yet, with this purported 'run out' scenario being projected for 2007, we're still using Uranium at a stately pace, with no alternatives in place for such a ridiculous contingency.
Consider the following facts
1) Over 50% of the world’s supply of Uranium is located in just 3 countries, Australia 30%, Canada 14% and Kazakhstan 17%. Even though Australia has the world’s largest reserves Canada produces the worlds most uranium accounting for 18% of total output.
2) Uranium prices have almost tripled since the start of 2004. If it were plentiful, the price would remain stable or fall, not triple in 2 years.
3) It is projected that world’s energy demand will increase by an additional 65% in approx 15 years. At this point in time the only solution that appears to have a chance of dealing with this increase is nuclear power plants; the only material able to power these plants is uranium.
4) One pound of Uranium produces roughly the same energy as 37 barrels of oil or 8.9 tons of coal; the choice is all but obvious.
Technically speaking there is more than enough uranium out there to power all the stations that are going to be built. The problem is that this uranium is in the ground and needs to be mined and at the moment there are not enough operating mines to produce all the uranium we need. Furthermore not enough money and resources are being dedicated to exploration and the opening up of new mines; another thing to remember is that it can take up to 2 years before a closed mine or a new mine becomes fully operational. Hence demand cannot be rapidly quenched even with the opening of 100’s of new mines. I agree with you that there is virtually an endless amount of uranium available in the Earths crust and in seawater; the main problem right now is the exorbitant cost factor in extracting it. One day it might be economical to obtain uranium from these sources but not right now.
The race to build new nuclear plants to supply developing nations future electric needs is about to create a very explosive situation. It’s no longer a matter of if but when this situation will go out of control; we do not have enough uranium above the ground to power current nuclear power plants. At present approx 50% of the demand is coming from reserve supplies (mostly the decommissioning of old nuclear war heads); imagine what will happen when all those new nuclear power plants come online. The tragedy here is that these plants can only operate on uranium and nothing else and so at some point in time these plants will have to do whatever it takes to get uranium or shut down. There is plenty of Uranium in the ground; the problem is that it takes time for these new mines to come online. It can take up to two years for these mines to be fully operational. So far no major effort has been mounted to address this issue and demand already exceeds supply and the supply situation keeps getting worse with the passage of each day.
A few experts in the field have written articles about new and existing technologies (both non military and military) out there that can extract additional energy from spent nuclear fuel rods (some experts suggest that only about 20-30% of the potential energy has been extracted from these spent nuclear rods.); the problem is always the same companies take forever to implement new technologies. As of now very few companies have decided to implement these technologies and another issue to consider is the cost factor. Even if cost were not issue there is still going to be a lag time between deciding to implement and implementing these new technologies. All one needs to do is look at the coal sector; cleaner coal burning technologies exist which make new coal plants nearly as clean burning as natural gas plants. However there has been no mad rush to build new coal plants even though the USA has extremely huge reserves. The thing to keep in mind is that most disasters are actually preventable but history has clearly indicated that man does not believe in prevention but only in responding after such an event has taken place.
One final note, DU rounds are made with DEPLETED uranium. DU is what is left after the fuel rods from a reactor are no longer useable as fuel. It is literally nuclear waste. So I'm not arguing for a shortage of DU.
