DolphinPrince t1_j80mzrg wrote
If the West didn't gut its nuclear energy production this wouldn't be such an issue. Relying on other nations to meet your energy needs seems like such a massive risk.
izit23 t1_j80v0p7 wrote
> the West
Well you can be more specific:
"Thus, even if solar or nuclear technologies were to be considered viable alternatives, they would not really displace fossil fuel energy for the next 40 to 50 years."
-- Exxon report written 40 years ago: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2805576-1982-Exxon-Memo-to-Management-About-CO2 page 24
They knew.
Pm-mepetpics t1_j816qpo wrote
Give them credit they’ve been very successful in downplaying the climate crisis and slowing down the shift to renewables. The cunts.
der_titan t1_j80p61e wrote
I don't think it's that easy. Russia enriches more than half of the world's uranium and today exports 15% of the US' total uranium purchases. The world's largest producer (Kazakhstan) is a landlocked former Soviet state that moves its uranium through Russia's borders.
Russia also builds and maintains most of the world's nuclear plants.
decomposition_ t1_j80ps9u wrote
Don’t forget about the Caspian Sea! It can carry cargo. It doesn’t necessarily have to go through Russia proper.
der_titan t1_j80spz6 wrote
They still have to transship through another country, because they don't have access to the ocean - and it's not as if they're surrounded by stable or western friendly countries. Plus Kazakhstan traditionally has quite strong relations with Russia, though it should be noted Kazakhstan is supporting Ukraine.
Regardless, the world's largest enrichment facilities are in Russia. They are expensive and take many years to build - the US only has one enrichment facility itself. For the foreseeable future, Russia is a major player with nuclear power generation.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments