Materials Supply in a Global Economy:

Implications for Nuclear and Wind Power

One issue that, until lately, has gotten little attention, is that of the global supply chain for some of the materials that are essential to the continued smooth operation of things that are essential to our well being and our way of life--such as the power plants that supply our electricity.

Recently, people have begun to think more about such issues.  The U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) has just published a report on developing a strategy to ensure secure and reliable supplies of critical materials.  The report identifies 35 minerals that are viewed as critical to U.S. economic and national security.  The U.S. is currently dependent on other countries for more than 50% of its demand for 29 of the 35 materials.  Among the 29, two are important to the energy industry--uranium for nuclear power plants, and rare earths for wind turbines.

While this initially seems frightening, the situation is really more complex.  Among the issues that need to be considered are whether the minerals come from close allies or from adversaries, whether there are sources in the U.S. that could be developed, or whether there are other alternatives. 

Although uranium is highlighted in the report, at present, 33% of our uranium comes from Canada and 19%, from Australia, both countries with which we have a strong positive relationship.  Therefore, the dependency is not as alarming as for other minerals upon which we depend.

The bigger problem, it seems to me, is with the rare earths, where 78% of our supply comes from China.  In fact, recent articles have indicated that China is making it clear that they are contemplating using the threat of cutting exports of rare earths or imposing tariffs on them as a bargaining tool. 

Rare earths are actually not so rare.  Rather, they are highly dispersed, so they are difficult to mine economically in most cases.  And they are used nowadays in more ways than many of us realize, from a variety of consumer products, including smartphones, televisions, cameras and light bulbs, to military equipment, to windmill turbines, so any extended market disruption could have serious effects on many aspects of our economy. 

The USDOC study is looking for ways to address the need for rare earths and other materials.  Some of the measures mentioned in the report include extracting rare earths from coal refuse and acid mine drainage and developing other alloys to replace some rare earths.  Efforts are also underway to explore the possibility of extracting rare earths, as well as uranium and other elements, from seawater. 

In the long run, it may also be possible to develop more mined sources for rare earths outside of China.  One problem in doing this, however, is that the rare earths, because they are so dispersed, produce a lot of mining waste, and many communities will not want such mines near them. 

Some analysts believe that China will not impose restrictions on the supply of rare earths yet, for fear of triggering a global initiative to find and develop alternative supplies.  However, the threat looms, and the search for ways to reduce our vulnerability should be stepped up before we face a crisis. 

In the meantime, what are the implications for nuclear and wind power, and what should we be doing?  In the case of nuclear power, I am not as worried, because so much of our uranium supply comes from strong allies.  Furthermore, some of the advanced nuclear reactor designs that are under development may be able to burn more of the uranium, or may use depleted uranium or thorium.  Nevertheless, efforts to increase uranium production in the U.S. would provide additional assurance of supply. 

In the case of wind turbines, the situation is more complicated, particularly since there is a strong push to increase the use of renewables in the U.S. and elsewhere, and much of that increase is coming from wind power.  One obvious way to address this problem would be to develop alternative alloys for use in wind turbines. 

Another measure is to assure that we do not rely too much on any one technology for our electricity supply.  This is a policy that is beneficial for a number of reasons, and has been discussed before in this blog.  Such a policy means that, as we move toward a cleaner energy supply, we should be sure to keep that energy supply diversified with a balanced mix of solar, wind and nuclear power plants.

***  

Scary Energy Scenarios:

My Real Fears on Halloween

From Wikimedia Commons

As I sit down to write this, I realize that I have been bombarded by more than the usual number of scary things this Halloween.  Of course, there are the ghosts and ghouls and goblins, the witches and werewolves, and the vampires and zombies.  But what haunts me more is the specter of an energy future resulting from decisions made on the basis of short-term profit, misinformation, and dogmatic ideologies.

So, it is not the eerie sounds emanating from the dark forest that scare me, or the creaky sounds from upstairs when I know that no one is there.  It is not the skeletons hanging from the trees and rattling in the wind. 

What really scares me is a future where we are less safe because our critical energy infrastructure is not being maintained or operated with the highest attention to safety.

What really scares me is a future where our energy and non-energy infrastructure is at risk because we failed to plan for changes in the environment, population, and emerging needs.

 

What really scares me is a future where I cannot get the energy I need because short-term pricing and market imperfections have caused valuable energy resources to shut down prematurely.  
 
What really scares me is a future where the air I breathe is dirtier because misguided attempts to manipulate the market by favoring particular technologies or handicapping others has resulted in more use of polluting sources to back up intermittent technologies.

What really scares me is a future where energy availability is restricted because not enough fuel is extracted, not enough power plants are built, and not enough transmission capacity exists because we did not find a way to balance local interests and societal needs. 

What really scares me is a future where the price of energy is pushed so high that that gulf between the haves and the have-nots becomes a chasm, and social unrest results.
 
What really scares me is a future where we become dependent on the whims of other regimes because we failed to develop our own resources or because we favored technologies that use materials that are scarce in our country.
 
What really scares me is a future where we have lost our voice on the international stage because we have taken too rigid and unrealistic a stand, or because we have failed to stay competitive in critical markets. 

What really scares me is a future where we are mired in the use of outdated technologies because we failed to invest in research and development.

What really scares me is a future where we do not realize our full potential in all areas because we are impoverished in the energy supplies that fuel advances in other areas, a better standard of living, and so much more.

 

These are my ghosts and goblins.  They pertain to all sources of energy and all parts of all the fuel cycles--fossil fuel extraction, gas pipelines, electricity transmission, nuclear power plants, windmills, rare earths, and more.  And, while Halloween will be over tomorrow, and the scary spiders and blow-up black cats and sheet-clad "ghosts" hanging from my neighbors' houses will be taken down in a few days, the things that trigger my energy fears, unfortunately, are not as easy to stuff back into boxes and store in the basement. 

I would like to think that common sense will ultimately prevail and that, in the very near future, we will exorcise the demons of shortsightedness, ignorance, and fanaticism when it comes to energy matters (as well as other matters).  Until then, I am scared.

Happy Halloween!

***