Skip to main content

Looking at the Uranium Supply

Some have expressed concern over a perceived shortage of uranium fuel to supply the world's existing and expanding fleet of nuclear power reactors. This fear is unjustified and simply perpetuates the now fully discredited Club of Rome's "Limits to Growth" argument that was popular in the early 1970s.

Of course, known resources of economically and technologically recoverable uranium have expanded significantly since the 1970s and will continue to do so into the future. The world'’s uranium resources will increase due to improved knowledge of geology, enhanced extraction and reactor technology and the higher uranium prices spurred by demand growth.

Uranium is a ubiquitous element in the earth'’s crust and oceans, as is thorium, another important, naturally-occurring metal that can support nuclear fission. The world's 440 reactors use approximately 180 million pounds of U3O8 annually, of which 56 million pounds are consumed by America'’s 103 operating reactors.

World demand is principally met from primary production (mining), liquidation of utility inventories, ever-improving fuel manufacturing and fabrication techniques and decommissioning nuclear weapons. Nearly half of the fuel used in U.S. nuclear energy plants is now derived from blended down uranium from decommissioned Russian nuclear weapons.

In what is the most successful nonproliferation program in history, the "Megatons-to-Megawatts" initiative, Russia has converted the highly enriched uranium (HEU) equivalent of nearly 10,000 warheads to low enriched uranium (LEU) for commercial fuel.

Forecasts of new nuclear generation expect approximately 40-60 new reactors worldwide by 2020. This will increase uranium demand to approximately 195 million pounds in 2010 and 240 million pounds by 2020. For an assumed price of $30/lb U3O8, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimated world uranium resources in 2003 to be 3,537,000 metric tons, an amount adequate to fuel conventional reactors for approximately 50 years. The IAEA further estimated all conventional uranium resources to be 14.4 million metric tons, an amount which would cover over 200 years'’ supply at current rates of consumption.

Importantly, these forecasts do not include non-conventional sources of uranium, such as those contained in phosphates or in seawater, which are currently not economic to extract but represent a near limitless supply of uranium to meet increased demand. Clearly, there are very adequate uranium (and thorium) resources to fuel the world's expanding nuclear fleet.

Of greater concern, however, is a general failure to recognize how applications of human ingenuity and technology have enhanced the world'’s supply of uranium. Higher capacity factors and reactor power levels, higher operating efficiencies, reprocessing of used nuclear fuel and development of new reactor designs are just a few examples of technological and operating improvements.

Many European countries (e.g. Belgium, France, and Switzerland) and Japan now reprocess used nuclear fuel to produce new, mixed-oxide fuel (MOX), thereby reducing the need for new primary uranium supplies. Moreover, advanced breeder reactors that produce as much, or more, fuel than they consume, will be commercially available within the next two decades. In fact, these reactors use the uranium 238 isotope as fuel which is one of the more abundant elements in the earth's crust.

Nuclear power has a very important role to play in providing the world with reliable, inexpensive and emissions-free power. There are now very adequate supplies of uranium that can be technologically exploited as the demand and economics of the uranium market improve. But above all else, we should not dismiss human ingenuity in developing new fuel sources and new reactor designs that will extend indefinitely the earth's supply of fissionable materials for generating electricity from nuclear energy.

POSTSCRIPT FROM THE EDITOR: One of the leading intellectual lights who helped debunk the Club of Rome's report was the late Julian Simon. To read more about his work and legacy, click here.

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

Tim said…
"The Limits of Growth" was debunked only by those who never actually read it. You might want to check Bush advisor Matt Simmons' The Limits of Growth Revisited.

Tim
Rob said…
"I am not a Malthusian, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not!" protesteth Mr. Simmons. Unfortunately for him, he is.
Rob said…
Oh, and from the executive summary:

The model we have constructed is, like every model, imperfect, oversimplified, and unfinished.

Yes, we know.
Tim said…
Malthus has been right--repeatedly. Read up on Easter Island if you don't think it can happen. Growth can't go on forever in a finite world. It's such a simple idea, it's amazing so many people can't understand it.
Anonymous said…
Do you have any sources for your assertion "advanced breeder reactors that produce as much, or more, fuel than they consume, will be commercially available within the next two decades"? I thought the French Superphoenix program is over with, the Japanese Monju experimental reactor will be reopened in 2008, there is a Russian fast neutron reactor coming on line in the 2010s, and a couple more experimental ones in Asia.
Anonymous said…
http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/genIvFastReactorRptToCongressDec2006.pdf
Here's the U.S. fast reactor strategy.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin