Send this article to a friend:


Ditching Russian Nuclear Fuel Is Easier Said Than Done
Tyler Durden

Russia's dominance in the global nuclear fuel market presents another massive challenge for Washington, especially the liberal hawks in the Biden administration, who are trying to wean Western countries off Russian energy supplies.

Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm said President Biden is redoubling efforts to break the US reliance on Russian nuclear fuel, indicating domestic uranium-enrichment capacity could be increased with upcoming key legislation. 

"We are going to get Congressional support in a bipartisan way for us to make our own fuel cycle supply chain independent, certainly of Russia," Granholm said in an interview at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, Bloomberg quoted. 

"We've got to make this happen for our own independence and national security," she continued. 

Bringing on new capacity could take years. For instance, uranium extracted from mines to refine into fuel for nuclear reactors takes three to five years. 

Russia controls about two-fifths of the global enrichment services market and supplies almost a quarter of the fuel for the US' 93 operational nuclear reactors. This is another chokepoint the US is trying to avoid.  

Earlier this year, Washington banned imports of Russian fossil fuel products, though uranium wasn't part of the sanctions. 

"We should not be sending any money to Russia for any American energy or for any other reason," Granholm said in May.

The Biden administration is working toward expanding a uranium supply chain to wean itself off Russian supplies though top congressional Democrats recently balked at Biden's $1.5 billion request in an upcoming budget bill to support domestic uranium enrichment programs. 

"We need to signal that the US is committed to its own fuel supply as well as the conversion and enrichment components of the supply chain. 

"This investment in our own supply chain is a critical piece of that," Granholm said in Vienna. 

The American nuclear industry could soon see a resurgence since the Three Mile Island facility accident in 1979 sent it into a tailspin for decades if Granholm and the Biden administration can get funding. 

She said the government would support the demand side rather than taking direct ownership stakes in facilities. 

"We would be using the market to make sure this capability gets out," she added. "We would contract with facilities. The goal is to be independent as soon as possible."

Several nuclear fuel supply chain companies, including Honeywell International Inc., General Atomics, and Centrus Energy Corp., could benefit from atomic independence from Russia. 



our mission:

to widen the scope of financial, economic and political information available to the professional investing public.
to skeptically examine and, where necessary, attack the flaccid institution that financial journalism has become.
to liberate oppressed knowledge.
to provide analysis uninhibited by political constraint.
to facilitate information's unending quest for freedom.
our method: pseudonymous speech...
Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. it thus exemplifies the purpose behind the bill of rights, and of the first amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation-- and their ideas from suppression-- at the hand of an intolerant society.

...responsibly used.

The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. but political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse.

Though often maligned (typically by those frustrated by an inability to engage in ad hominem attacks) anonymous speech has a long and storied history in the united states. used by the likes of mark twain (aka samuel langhorne clemens) to criticize common ignorance, and perhaps most famously by alexander hamilton, james madison and john jay (aka publius) to write the federalist papers, we think ourselves in good company in using one or another nom de plume. particularly in light of an emerging trend against vocalizing public dissent in the united states, we believe in the critical importance of anonymity and its role in dissident speech. like the economist magazine, we also believe that keeping authorship anonymous moves the focus of discussion to the content of speech and away from the speaker- as it should be. we believe not only that you should be comfortable with anonymous speech in such an environment, but that you should be suspicious of any speech that isn't.

Send this article to a friend: