Posted on 11/03/2009 5:49:02 AM PST by bestintxas
The United States has largest energy reserves on Earth, according to a report from the Congressional Research Service.
As shown in the charts below, the U.S. has 1,321 billion barrels of oil (or barrels of oil equivalent for other sources of energy) when combining its recoverable natural gas, oil and coal reserves.
While Russia is a close second with 1,248 billion barrels, other energy producing nations are far behind. No. 3 is Saudi Arabia (543 billion barrels), followed by China (494 billion barrels), Iran (426 billion barrels) and Canada (221 billion barrels.)
"Our overwhelming coal, natural gas, and oil resources represent tens of trillions of dollars in wealth and millions of American jobs,” said Sen. James Inhofe (R.-Ok.), who, along with Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R.-Alaska), released the report last week. “Whether through decree or purposeful inaction, government policies that unnecessarily restrict or prevent our ability to responsibly produce these domestic resources are threatening, and could eventually undermine, our nation's economic and national security. We should pursue an all-of-the-above strategy that advances new energy technologies but also prioritizes developing the resources we have today."
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Stupid are the Americans
I haven’t forgotten my congressman standing in a darkened house of representatives with an empty gas can calling the democrats to return and deal with energy legislation. Gas was over $4 a gallon and the democrats were too busy vacationing to deal with it.
And evil are the environmentalists (who used to call themselves communists) that con these poor sheep into adopting these policies. Whatever name they use, they are America-hating leftist and their only purpose is to retard the economic powerhouse that is this country.
Hmmmm, they only look at fossil fuels. The best source we have, for now, if fission. I think we have some 400 yrs worth of Uranium in the USA.
for some insight into their thought processes.
Yes, they truly don't want their country or culture to be successful. They are also, in the case of "white" liberals, auto-racists.
It’s racism to get at it.
And most of our uranium comes from foreign sources.
Uranium Purchased by Owners and Operators of U.S. Civilian NuclearPower Reactors
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/umar/summaryfig1.html
US uranium reserves are about 20~25 years of our commercial reactors, less our military use.
U.S. Forward-Cost Uranium Reserves by State, 2003
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/reserves/uresst.html
Thanks for the reference - very insightful.
HAHA! Works for me! Years ago, standing next to another mother at a field trip for 3rd graders in an affluent suburb, the woman commented that the entire situation in the Middle East had her totally perplexed. I simply told her that, just as in the politics in this country, you have to get over your white guilt, in Middle East politics, you've got to get over your success guilt.
Liberals won’t let us have any because they want it all for themselves. Call it what you will, but their view is selfish and greedy.
U.S. Forward-Cost Uranium Reserves by State, December 31, 2003
State(s) $30 per pound $50 per pound
Ore
(million tons) Gradea
(percent U3O8) U3O8
(million pounds) Ore
(million tons) Gradea
(percent U3O8) U3O8
(million pounds)
Wyoming 41 0.129 106 238 0.076 363
New Mexico 15 0.280 84 102 0.167 341
Arizona, Colorado, Utah 8 0.281 45 45 0.138 123
Texas 4 0.077 6 18 0.063 23
Otherb 6 0.199 24 21 0.094 40
Total 74 0.178 265 424 0.105 890
At 30$ per pound, we have 264 million pounds, at $50 per pound that jumps to 890 million pounds which would enrich to approximately 6.4 million pounds of 95% U235. Power stations use 5% U235 as I understand it. So we have 120 million pounds of fuel in our major reserves. As the reactor cook, they create significant quantities of plutonium, another fuel. I’m no expert and couldn’t find how much fuel goes into an average reactor per year. But I think we’re a lot closer to 400 yrs that 25 yrs.
Read the article I linked in #5.
Liberals aren’t so much wanting to use it themselves, though that is definitely a part of the equation, since they see themselves as the elite ruling class.
They just don’t want our country, economy, or culture to succeed. And squelching our energy usage accomplishes this goal.
We buy 50~60 million pounds every year.
How does that supply last 400 years at that rate of consumption?
Oh, oh. By Sen. Inhofe saying “We should pursue an all-of-the-above strategy” he just ruined any presidential aspirations he may have had in the future according to r9etb! LOL!!!
U.S. Forward-Cost Uranium Reserves by State, 2003 http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/reserves/uresst.html
Are those number for U235 or U238? I had heard that the US has about 25 years worth of U235 but also has about 1000 years of U238. I think there is an effort ongoing to develop breeder reactors that will use U235 to initiate the reaction of U238. If that works, I have been told we will be set for Uranium for centuries.
Go to the link in post 7. I believe it to be total.
I believe those numbers are for U235 only. The graph says that its is for "Uranium Purchased by Owners and Operators of U.S. Civilian NuclearPower Reactors". Right now, there is no need for Nuclear Power Reactors to purchase U238...Not until the first breeder reactor is actually built.
So your 400 year prediction is based upon using a technology not in use today?
Breeder reactors have been used on a small scale at lab scale. Right now Japan and France are fighting over international funding to build the first full-scale commercial breeder reactor. They have been squabbling for about 10-12 years (maybe more now) and don't seem to be getting anywhere. I was hoping our own government would fund building one but I think the greenies still have everyone in Congress cowed about nukes.
Right now Japan and France are fighting over international funding to build the first full-scale commercial breeder reactor.
- - - - -
No, France has already built two and shut them back down.
There have been two significant fast breeder reactors in France. Near Marcoule is the 233 MWe Phenix reactor, which started operation in 1974 and was jointly owned by CEA and EdF. It was shut down for modification 1998-2003, returned at 140 MWe for six years, and ceased power generation in March 2009, though it continued in test operation and to maintain research programs by CEA until October 2009.
A second unit was Super-Phenix of 1200 MWe, which started up in 1996 but was closed down for political reasons at the end of 1998 and is now being decommissioned. The operation of Phenix is fundamental to France’s research on waste disposal, particularly transmutation of actinides.
Nuclear Power in France
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf40.html
- - - - -
In Japan:
In July 2005 the Atomic Energy Commission reaffirmed policy directions for nuclear power in Japan, while confirming that the immediate focus would be on LWRs. The main elements are that a “30-40% share or more” shall be the target for nuclear power in total generation after 2030, including replacement of current plants with advanced light water reactors. Fast breeder reactors will be introduced commercially, but not until about 2050. Used fuel will be reprocessed domestically to recover fissile material for use in MOX fuel. Disposal of high-level wastes will be addressed after 2010.
Nuclear Power in Japan
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf79.html
I would recommend a better source for breeder reactor information:
Fast Neutron Reactors
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/default.aspx?id=540&terms=breeder
Sorry for the multiple responses. But I was looking for better site to address this topic. I've clipped it into a summary here but much more detail is located at the link.
Nuclear Fuel Production: A Four-Step Process
http://www.nei.org/howitworks/factsheets/nuclearfuelproduction/
Natural uranium contains two different forms, or isotopes: U-238 and U-235. U-235 is fissionable, which means its atoms can be split, releasing large amounts of heat. However, natural uranium consists of more than 99 percent U-238 and less than 1 percent U-235. Before uranium can be used as a fuel, an “enrichment” process must increase its U-235 content to 3 percent to 5 percent.
The lighter U-235 is “fissionable”...
Utilities can buy uranium and have it converted and enriched, or they can buy uranium already enriched. Uranium producers sell enrichment services in “separative work units,” or SWUs. SWU is a measure of the amount of energy needed to raise the concentration of U-235 to a specified level.
The uranium oxide, or yellowcake, requires further processing before its use as a fuel. In the next step, the uranium oxide goes to a conversion plant, which removes impurities and chemically converts the material to uranium hexafluoride. The compound is heated to become a gas, then loaded into cylinders, where it cools and condenses into a solid.
There are two ways to enrich uranium—gaseous diffusion and gas centrifuge. The gaseous diffusion enrichment process is the only method now used in the United States.
A fuel fabricator converts uranium hexafluoride, after enrichment, into uranium dioxide powder and presses it into fuel pellets. The fabricator loads the ceramic pellets into long tubes made of a noncorrosive material, usually a zirconium alloy. Once grouped together into a bundle, these tubes, or fuel rods, form a “fuel assembly.”
Seems there are differing opinions on reserves. I stand by the 400 yr number that I have always heard. Got this from:
http://nuclearinfo.net/Nuclearpower/WebHomeAvailabilityOfUsableUranium
“At a price of $US110 per kg the known reserves amount to about 85 years supply at the current level of consumption with an expected further 500 years supply in additional or speculative reserves. The price of Uranium would have to increase by over a factor of 3 before it would have an impact of the cost of electricity generated from Nuclear Power. Such a price rise would stimulate a substantial increase in exploration activities with a consequent increase in the size of the resource (as has been the case with every other mineral of value). The price of Uranium rose to a peak of over 300/kg in 2007 but has since declined to $165 by early 2008.. The world reserves of Uranium have increased by around 50% since the end of 2003”
I find the last sentence interesting, a dollar says they continue to increase. It’s a big planet, takes time to find stuff.
It is interesting you would use the word “reserves” to describe ore that has not yet be found, but might exist. Why stop at 400 years?
I do agree that if we allow more mining, exploration and processing in the US, we would have larger reserves. Not allowing civilian reprocessing of nuclear fuel (like France, UK, Russia, Japan and India already do) is very foolish and puts us at greater dependence of other nations for our energy needs. But this is a policy that is spread throughout our energy sources.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.