Finland starts much-delayed nuclear plant, brings respite to power market

Re:Finland starts much-delayed nuclear plant, brings respite... by pfdietz on Saturday March 12, 2022 @05:29PM (#30655587)

It was in the environment already in the same sense the uranium in coal was also in the environment already.

Maybe the problem is the uranium mine tailings are safely off in some poor country, not in the US where the coal ash would be?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finland starts much-delayed nuclear plant, brings respite... by nitrogen on Saturday March 12, 2022 @07:21PM (#30656542)

They're in the US: https://www.energy.gov/em/moab-uranium-mill-tailings-remedia...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finland starts much-delayed nuclear plant, brings respite... by pfdietz on Sunday March 13, 2022 @07:44AM (#30660395)

Most (99% as of 2018) uranium production is outside the US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_uranium_p...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finland starts much-delayed nuclear plant, brings respite... by natmaka on Sunday March 13, 2022 @08:12AM (#30660554)

Very recently: U.S. utilities push White House not to sanction Russian uranium, see https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/exclusive-us-utiliti...

Moreover the more we obtain uranium (prospecting, mining, milling...), the more we add to the associated carbon footprint. Therefore a sustained growth of installed nuclear capacity will lead us to exploit mines at always lowering ore grades => more emissions.

Scientific studies are clear: M. Lenzen ("between 10 and 130 g CO2-e/kWhel, with an average of 65 g") and E. Warner et G. Heath ("9 to 110 g CO‐eq/kWh by 2050")...

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222817608_Life_cycl...

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2051332

[ Parent | on HN ]