Fossil-free energy systems are not only cleaner than fossil-based ones—they reduce a country’s dependence on imports for their energy supply. However, this has not so far been the case for nuclear energy, which requires imports of multiple materials, including its fuel. The U.S., among other countries, are realizing this, and are taking action to secure their critical materials and components.
The nuclear supply chain is vast, encompassing everything from lithium and nickel to enriched uranium for fuel. While the supply chain employs nearly half a million people in the U.S. alone, most of these materials are produced elsewhere and transported worldwide.
Historically, the international trade of nuclear materials has built trust between nuclear nations, but in a future beset by geopolitical conflict and climate change, the value chains are likely to be disrupted. It has become a priority for the US to build domestic sources for the crucial supply chains. As nuclear energy provides the largest source of clean power in the U.S., dependence on foreign sources of materials and components should be reduced as we phase out oil and gas from our energy grids.
Metals and minerals are critical to nuclear energy in the U.S., but while some materials are imported, their supply can never be guaranteed. Photo by Lorin Both on Unsplash.
A report from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) analyzed the vulnerabilities in the U.S. nuclear energy supply chain and found that many imported materials could instead be produced domestically. Most importantly, high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) is almost entirely supplied by Tenex in Russia, with U.S. production just starting.
The Biden-Harris administration took steps to make U.S. nuclear energy more independent, improving energy security while reducing transport emissions. In March of this year, President Biden signed off on a bill that included $2.72 billion to build out the supply chain for advanced nuclear fuel. In October, the DOE awarded contracts for the deconversion and enrichment of HALEU.
But it is not only the enrichment of uranium that is reliant on other countries today. While the U.S. has a small amount of uranium mining, most of it happens in countries such as Kazakhstan and Australia. To alleviate this, and reduce the ecological impact of uranium mining, scientists are currently researching the possibility of extracting uranium from seawater. If this approach can be implemented at scale, it could make uranium a renewable resource available almost anywhere.
Moreover, nuclear fuel is not the only material at risk of disruptions. Critical materials such as graphite and minerals such as yttrium are 100% imported and mostly supplied by China. To truly secure the nuclear supply chain, all components must be secured. As we move into a new administration, we look forward to this work continuing.
•
15 w
Nucleaire energie is not only hazardous in its production but also before and aftermaths of such a building’s construction which should provide this energy non stop, furthermore the material which forms the residual output of such an installation, being for many decades still radioactive, in their existence even stocked somewhere far from human neighbourhoods, they show still an unsolved very high risk factor. Instead of promoting radioactive energy centres which always get their raw materials from this earth without any slight difference at all from the oil and gas or coal industries, which are doomed to be found with no new sources of exploitation very soon, the nuclear power industry will also become useless, when the last reserves of uranium in Afghanistan and Australia will be depleted. For my liking, to look for some new solar energy production and e-energy accumulation solutions worldwide, would be a much better place to restart everything, than pushing all poor countries, together with their energy hungry rich neighbours to build new atomic power stations everywhere. Additionally if something unexpected would occur and because of an unknown source or celestial activity, all already built atomic power stations would become very dangerous in their existence, all over the world, causing an explosion danger, which could wipe out the entire world population, I can not imagine that even Mr Musk would be able to transport thousands of the millionaires, of that time to somewhere else, only to save their lives, to Mars, to Venus or somewhere even more remote and we would be really trapped in a deadlock which would become much more breathtaking and nerve breaking than the water inundation’s and increasingly hot summers we must endure just now. My advice would always be: nuclear power centrals ? Forget about them !!
•
•
16 w
Bringing nuclear fuel production home is a smart step toward energy independence & a cleaner, fossil-free future, enhancing both sustainability and security.
•
•
16 w
This can be a safer alternative than the use of fossil fuels
•
16 w
This is dependable energy as compared to fossil fuels and also it's environmental friendly
•
•
16 w
Extracting uranium from seawater could revolutionize nuclear energy