Zaremba, H. (2019, June 17). America Has Enough Uranium To Power Country For 100 Years. Retrieved from https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/America-Has-Enough-Uranium-To-Power-Country-For-100-Years.html.
The U.S. will be looking for ways to reduce carbon emissions in an effort to reach the goals set by the Paris agreement. Although the U.S. has since backed out of the agreement, many of the people still agree that emission levels need to be reduced. Nuclear power has proven to be an effective source of power, but the bigger question is “where will the fuel come from?”. Research has shown that the U.S. has enough uranium to power the country for hundreds of years; but the U.S. generally doesn’t mine or refine its low-concentrated ore. Australia and Canada have high grade mines as well as Russia who are putting up large reactors once a year for the next ten years. The U.S. is still one of the largest users of nuclear fuel, but we are steadily falling back.
While nuclear power does seem like the solution to this carbon problem, we still are faced with the issue of drilling for uranium fuel. Drilling into grounds can throw ecosystems out of balance and destroy habitats. It is not a race to see who can create the most carbon efficient energy, but more to see who can create energy with the least environmental impact. It is not as easy as saying nuclear power is the complete solution to our energy issues, but it is a step in the right direction. Mining in our own country could prove to be the most effective energy source for producing low carbon energy and removing the reliance on other countries for fuel.
I agree and think we should be utilizing the deposits of uranium in store. Nuclear power isn’t the solution to the crisis of sustainable energy, but it’s a step in the right direction from fossil fuels.
I totally agree that we should not be focusing on carbon emissions alone but as environmental impact as a whole. The nuclear waste and habitat destruction that comes with using nuclear energy are definitely enough of an impact to make it less than viable as a long term energy source.
I agree with the author that nuclear power isn’t the solution to the crisis of sustainable energy. I do see it as a step in the right direction from fossil fuels.
I would disagree that nuclear is not a viable solution to the current situation of carbon emissions. Uranium and other potential fuel sources to be used for fission (like thorium) are present worldwide and have zero net emissions from energy production. While it may not solve all of our energy demands because we still require fuels for transportation, it is still thousands of times more efficient than other energies in terms of emissions and unusable wastes.
I agree with your points on how Nuclear energy isn’t quite as sustainable as one might presume it to be. How do you think drilling could be improved?