<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Will Peak Uranium Hit Nuclear Plants?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/22/will-peak-uranium-hit-nuclear-plants/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/22/will-peak-uranium-hit-nuclear-plants/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 22:41:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: A geologist</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/22/will-peak-uranium-hit-nuclear-plants/#comment-3982</link>
		<dc:creator>A geologist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2008 13:59:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1745#comment-3982</guid>
		<description>I understood from the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) that the current crunch date for uranium is around 75 years from now, based upon currently known reserves and deposits and ignoring any new technology or new reserves that may be found along the way.

Nuclear operators are nervous because they may have to pay higher prices than they have historically, thus shaving their profit margins, not because there is any lack of resource as you imply. There is a lack of enrichment capacity in the western world, but that is not the same thing at all. We can build new capacity (and the French currently are doing just that).

It is absolutely normal for companies involved in the processing or use of uranium to attempt to secure long-term supplies in order that they can control their expenses.

Unlike many metals uranium is not only economic to extract from rare high-grade deposits. Indeed many of the USA&#039;s own uranium comes from very low grade deposits. I&#039;m assuming that high quality equals high grade in your terms.

If you want to find fault with the expansion of the nuclear industry do it on basis of long-term cost to the tax payer, not on scare stories about security of uranium supply.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understood from the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) that the current crunch date for uranium is around 75 years from now, based upon currently known reserves and deposits and ignoring any new technology or new reserves that may be found along the way.</p>
<p>Nuclear operators are nervous because they may have to pay higher prices than they have historically, thus shaving their profit margins, not because there is any lack of resource as you imply. There is a lack of enrichment capacity in the western world, but that is not the same thing at all. We can build new capacity (and the French currently are doing just that).</p>
<p>It is absolutely normal for companies involved in the processing or use of uranium to attempt to secure long-term supplies in order that they can control their expenses.</p>
<p>Unlike many metals uranium is not only economic to extract from rare high-grade deposits. Indeed many of the USA&#8217;s own uranium comes from very low grade deposits. I&#8217;m assuming that high quality equals high grade in your terms.</p>
<p>If you want to find fault with the expansion of the nuclear industry do it on basis of long-term cost to the tax payer, not on scare stories about security of uranium supply.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A geologist</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/22/will-peak-uranium-hit-nuclear-plants/#comment-21423</link>
		<dc:creator>A geologist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2008 13:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1745#comment-21423</guid>
		<description>I understood from the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) that the current crunch date for uranium is around 75 years from now, based upon currently known reserves and deposits and ignoring any new technology or new reserves that may be found along the way.

Nuclear operators are nervous because they may have to pay higher prices than they have historically, thus shaving their profit margins, not because there is any lack of resource as you imply. There is a lack of enrichment capacity in the western world, but that is not the same thing at all. We can build new capacity (and the French currently are doing just that).

It is absolutely normal for companies involved in the processing or use of uranium to attempt to secure long-term supplies in order that they can control their expenses.

Unlike many metals uranium is not only economic to extract from rare high-grade deposits. Indeed many of the USA&#039;s own uranium comes from very low grade deposits. I&#039;m assuming that high quality equals high grade in your terms.

If you want to find fault with the expansion of the nuclear industry do it on basis of long-term cost to the tax payer, not on scare stories about security of uranium supply.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understood from the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) that the current crunch date for uranium is around 75 years from now, based upon currently known reserves and deposits and ignoring any new technology or new reserves that may be found along the way.</p>
<p>Nuclear operators are nervous because they may have to pay higher prices than they have historically, thus shaving their profit margins, not because there is any lack of resource as you imply. There is a lack of enrichment capacity in the western world, but that is not the same thing at all. We can build new capacity (and the French currently are doing just that).</p>
<p>It is absolutely normal for companies involved in the processing or use of uranium to attempt to secure long-term supplies in order that they can control their expenses.</p>
<p>Unlike many metals uranium is not only economic to extract from rare high-grade deposits. Indeed many of the USA&#8217;s own uranium comes from very low grade deposits. I&#8217;m assuming that high quality equals high grade in your terms.</p>
<p>If you want to find fault with the expansion of the nuclear industry do it on basis of long-term cost to the tax payer, not on scare stories about security of uranium supply.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: casper</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/22/will-peak-uranium-hit-nuclear-plants/#comment-3981</link>
		<dc:creator>casper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 02:09:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1745#comment-3981</guid>
		<description>might as well use solar energy to convert waste uranium into the more reactive stuff using electron bombardment. or revive old research to use lighter reactive substances in reactors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>might as well use solar energy to convert waste uranium into the more reactive stuff using electron bombardment. or revive old research to use lighter reactive substances in reactors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: casper</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/22/will-peak-uranium-hit-nuclear-plants/#comment-21422</link>
		<dc:creator>casper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 02:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1745#comment-21422</guid>
		<description>might as well use solar energy to convert waste uranium into the more reactive stuff using electron bombardment. or revive old research to use lighter reactive substances in reactors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>might as well use solar energy to convert waste uranium into the more reactive stuff using electron bombardment. or revive old research to use lighter reactive substances in reactors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lawrnc</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/22/will-peak-uranium-hit-nuclear-plants/#comment-3980</link>
		<dc:creator>Lawrnc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 19:56:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1745#comment-3980</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s a lot of uranium in the US that isn&#039;t being mined, not only in the western states.   There are also thought to be significant uranium deposits in the Appalachian mountains on the US east coast.



The US also has a stupendous amount of highly enriched uranium that is great fuel, but is currently prohibited by US law for being used as fuel.  This was done as a knee jerk reaction to three mile island.



The US is mostly alone in prohibiting the use of reprocessed material.  A majority of the nuclear powered nations use it to power their reactors.  If there is ever a real uranium shortage, that US law would only need to be overturned to give the US a huge supply of fuel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s a lot of uranium in the US that isn&#8217;t being mined, not only in the western states.   There are also thought to be significant uranium deposits in the Appalachian mountains on the US east coast.</p>
<p>The US also has a stupendous amount of highly enriched uranium that is great fuel, but is currently prohibited by US law for being used as fuel.  This was done as a knee jerk reaction to three mile island.</p>
<p>The US is mostly alone in prohibiting the use of reprocessed material.  A majority of the nuclear powered nations use it to power their reactors.  If there is ever a real uranium shortage, that US law would only need to be overturned to give the US a huge supply of fuel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lawrnc</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/22/will-peak-uranium-hit-nuclear-plants/#comment-21421</link>
		<dc:creator>Lawrnc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 19:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1745#comment-21421</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s a lot of uranium in the US that isn&#039;t being mined, not only in the western states.   There are also thought to be significant uranium deposits in the Appalachian mountains on the US east coast.



The US also has a stupendous amount of highly enriched uranium that is great fuel, but is currently prohibited by US law for being used as fuel.  This was done as a knee jerk reaction to three mile island.



The US is mostly alone in prohibiting the use of reprocessed material.  A majority of the nuclear powered nations use it to power their reactors.  If there is ever a real uranium shortage, that US law would only need to be overturned to give the US a huge supply of fuel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s a lot of uranium in the US that isn&#8217;t being mined, not only in the western states.   There are also thought to be significant uranium deposits in the Appalachian mountains on the US east coast.</p>
<p>The US also has a stupendous amount of highly enriched uranium that is great fuel, but is currently prohibited by US law for being used as fuel.  This was done as a knee jerk reaction to three mile island.</p>
<p>The US is mostly alone in prohibiting the use of reprocessed material.  A majority of the nuclear powered nations use it to power their reactors.  If there is ever a real uranium shortage, that US law would only need to be overturned to give the US a huge supply of fuel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

