Why the U.S. Buys So Much Nuclear Fuel From Russia | WSJ 

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Russia uses energy as a weapon. US uses money and sanctions on trade.

😂😂😂

The law is for you, not for me. A bunch of hypocrites =))

Because the mission is to sell Europe LNG in tankers for much higher prices then they would get here in the states.

I don't get the problem here. Because of our irrational hate of Russia, we want to diversify from them? That's so stupid. We should let the free market determine what's needed. If nuclear is good, the free market will create that demand in the United States.

Not profitable for corporations to invest in longterm.

An addition to your summary. The US had a thriving mining, conversion, enriching, and fabrication industry but through political ineptitudes and the US government subsidizing Russia’s industry (yes, we subsidize Russia’s nuclear industry), we lost that capability.

@@bigbuilder10 Globalization. Cheaper. To outsource. Americans don't want dirty mining jobs.

Thank you for saving us time

Exactly. USA be like- “rules for thee but not for me”

*The discount is just pre-sanction price!!!* *Which is way higher than Pre covid price!* *Thanks to the sanctions, the price of crude has touched the historic roof*

- *"Jen Psaki asked India ‘Which side of history do you want to be on?’"* Not on nazi side.

a world based on rules... American rules. ☝

not on colonialist side@@SpaceA.

RULES for the not for me the empire

Well Russia doesn't have monopoly on America's energy needs or supply chain!

Funny how both USA and Europe loves complaining about India buying oil from Russia.

The comparison is not entirely appropriate . Europe has not sanctioned nuclear fuel from Russia either. Whereas the USA has sanctioned gas and oil from Russia.

Both are idiotic policies. Energy and food independence asap for the west.

Nowhere because many places in Europe would literally be out of power without the option of nuclear power too.

@@SuperCatacata So the politic of sanction is a big lie. Why should I pay more for my gas liquid in Europe ? It is not my war.

The funny thing is that Russia hasn't refused to sell anything. It's the west sanctioning themselves from buying Russian energy then turned around and accused Russia of energy blackmail.. Smh

We have weaponised everything from food to energy too, so whats the point in trying to cry about it as if you have a right to do something to someone that another doesn't have the same right to do to you. You have made a valid point.

They want to motivate us ‘muricans to want to go into Russia and “take out Putin” to get our grubby paws on the sweet and savory as well as plentiful resources from within. They don’t think we know when we’re being manipulated. That’s why they use certain language, basically to manipulate, in this case for a war the elites will get wealthy from but will kill all of us. I guess back in the day most didn’t question these things, you can make the case and say these WSJ zio-globalists are still stuck, “back in the day.”

The law is for you, not for me. A bunch of hypocrites

@@Davik.N It is part of American 's DNA.

There are enrichment facilities in other NATO countries as well. They said it in the video.

@@holysong2099, so US nuclear arms fully depend on supply from other countries?

Enrichment of uranium is not that hard.

​@@jovancleanseMost supplies for anything come from other countries other than the united states.😂😅😂

@@jovancleansebecause they use dollars.

That's irrelevant. Niger does not produce enriched uranium which is what this piece is about. The shortage is for enriched uranium, not the raw mineral.

​@@masong8332 no produce, pero puede enviar a paises que si produzcan

@@masong8332 Mine uranium, is an rare mineral.

@@anxel- There is no shortage of raw uranium. It is about as rare as lead. This issue is enrichment capacity.

​@masong8332 there is a shortage not short-term but long-term because Kazakhstan uranium mining is controlled by Russia&China and over a 100 nuclear power plant are unde construction/planned

You would be too if the Ruble was worth anything. its called leverage, like oil or gas

@@icu17siberia the problem is it’s useless once you use it. everyone is very wary of using U.S dollars now. China uses RNMBI the EU uses Euros and nobody is using dollars that the pre war rate anymore and it will further decline.

Because the US lowkey doesn't like its people but bows to mega corporations.

because politicians wonot get kickback then

That's anti capitalism

Abandon nuclear. Too expensive. Creating demand for nuclear fuel helps support russian nuclear industries, either directly or indirectly.

Have you been to your local DMV recently?

I suggest it was *never* profitable to refine uranium or plutonium. Nuclear has required enormous subsidy and support in every nation. In the US, the decline has been a bit more obvious, whereas in Russia and China they can simply make it a state secret. Comparisons are harder because they deliberately separated internal and external currency.

@@aaroncosier735 You think so because only Russia has second-generation industrial fast neutron reactors. These reactors convert any nuclear waste from any technology into clean electricity. Unfortunately, the US and EU have completely lost nuclear competence. You can buy a couple of these reactors from Russia and use your country's nuclear waste to generate energy at a large profit.

And they turn all their eyes blind after the US blew up the Nord Stream pipeline.

Energy *is* weaponised. The more nuclear, the more russia's nuclear programme is paid for by other countries, including the US.

Did Russia try to use Europe's energy dependence on it as a diplomatic tool after the invasion, when the world was considering sanctions?

@@Norsilca Europe is still buying Russian oil, it's just being laundered through India now. Russia never stopped selling it. Russia also never imposed sanctions on Europe or America.

@@yojimbo3681 Alright, you didn't answer my question; fair enough, I googled it myself. Russia cut off much of its natural gas to Europe in 2022. This is clearly what the video was referring to. It obviously is leveraging it, not just selling it.

@@Norsilca If it's natural gas you were talking about, didn't the US blow up Nordstream? They first said it was Russia, then changed their story to a "Pro-Ukrainian Group". That's a pretty big change in story for the world's finest intelligence organization.

@@NorsilcaDude you blew up their pipeline, enforce a price tag on their products and you want them to happily abide to all that bullshits? And then when they don’t you have the audacity to accuse them of leveraging? More like they're adapting.

On Hillary’s watch, followed shortly by a contribution to a certain fund….?

A sale approved by Sec. of State Clinton that benefited acClinton Foundation donor. Then sold to Rosatom. Strange deal. But suspect at best. - Matt’s dad Dan

Because it is, just as Kosovo is Serbia, Crimea is Russia. Maybe all of Europe is Russia? Except!! Except Kosovo, because that my dude is Serbia. Next!

That's a normal day in. American

No one skilled in running it.... 😂😂😂😂

You are right but if you look from russia's perspective they wouldnt want to tamper with it since ut would be bad for their business. Think about it. Lets say they tamper with it and usa findd out. That would shut down business which would be a loss for russia too

Russia wants the money

​@Sir_Vantage European unions Countries the most buyer of Russian gas, America is just over charged because their are stupid.

Building better future nuclear power plants would solve this problem entirely and save money. Because enrichment is complicated, expensive, and unnecessary. Canadian CANDU nuclear reactors use natural uranium concentrate (yellowcake) as fuel. Meaning the fuel is both safer, cheaper, and fully domestically sourced and produced. American reactors are generally older, require richer fuel, and are harder to operate.

​@anirudhnarla4711 True but that's not enough. We should've been ready by now

Uranium ore is only dangerous to be near when it's processed / being extracted. When it is dormant, the radiation particles from it can't break through skin. The dog is perfectly safe, as are the humans. Once extraction begins, they would have to wear protective gear as the dust particles that are made during extraction are dangerous to breathe in. The mine in this video is not yet active, so it's relatively safe for people and the dog to walk around in.

That is Atomo the Atomic Dog, scourge of evil doers everywhere

The issue highlighted in this piece isn't raw uranium, it is enriched uranium. There is no shortage of the raw mineral

Because molten-fuel reactors are not feasible with current materials. Insofar as a couple of experimental reactors were used to test aspects of the basic principle, these could only operate for a few thousand hours. To operate a commercial reactor for twenty years it will need to be built from materials that simply do not exist yet. Metal embrittlement remains a problem for all reactors. Molten salt reactors face the additional challenge of corrosion from fuel salts and fission products. Insofar as the 60's reactors were a "success" at demonstrating operation as a once-off (yes, fission is possible, yes breeding can happen), there is no no data to say that such a reactor would actually operate well long term, that the ratios of fuel to products would remain within usable boundaries, or that power production would be consistent. They are not being built because they are not yet feasible beyond small, temporary experimental systems.

Клоун

And then complain when supposedly essential capabilities are in the control of other nations: High end CPUs, PV silicon, nuclear fuel, oil.

Do you mean that environmental pollution takes into account the political map of the world?

Truth....most people outside the US don't get that. Russians don't mind doing it, they little but natural resource and they don't care how they extract those resources. So, let them do it as long as they're willing.

The U.S. wants a friendly REE supply chain so U.S. companies are partnering with Australian ones to process Australian ores into finished products. This is underway now. Not sure why the same is not happening with uranium ore/yellowcake if there is a scarcity in the U.S. since mining uranium is not controversial here and has been going on for decades. Plus we have the largest deposits in the world. Australia has no enrichment capabilities beyond making yellowcake though.

Can't have everything, especially in technology and sanctions, don't work in today's economy. America is no longer superpowers in the world 50s to 80s.

Because that would cost enormously more for only partial success. The existing reactor fleet is designed to burn uranium fuel. Some reactors can tolerate a percentage of MOX fuel. Spent MOX fuel has longer cooling requirements, requires lower density disposal, and is more expensive to reprocess. There is no closed fuel cycle *anywhere*.

@@aaroncosier735 All of EU and Japan have closed cycle there is no political will in us to build

@@floopybits8037 No they don't. They have similar reactors to everywhere else. Most spent fuel remains in temporary storage. The reprocessed wastes are not returned to the fuel cycle. The fission products require encapsulation and disposal, and the leftover plutonium is just a proliferation risk. Very little gets used in MOX fuels, and used MOX fuel is even harder to manage. I repeat: there is no closed fuel cycle available.

Now, Russian economy is boombing in Europe, but the rest of Europe is not/

This has nothing to do with national defense. There is an embarrassing excess of weapons grade plutonium, plenty for weapons. This is about enrichment for civilian reactor fuel.