A Brief Overview of the Current Situation

In my previous article, “Nuclear Power Has A Dark Secret,” I examined the ways in which nuclear energy is intertwined with Russian interests. To summarize, Russia currently supplies 35% of the world's uranium enrichment services. Although countries like Australia and Kazakhstan are rich in raw uranium, it requires enrichment to be utilized in nuclear reactors. The essential isotope, U235, constitutes a mere 0.7% of natural uranium, necessitating a complex and costly enrichment process to achieve the required 5% U235 concentration.

Despite significant expansions in nuclear power capacity, Western nations have not increased their uranium enrichment capabilities over recent decades due to economic constraints. Consequently, many NATO members, including the US, UK, France, and Germany, find themselves heavily dependent on Russian-enriched uranium. Notably, the US alone spends approximately $100 million monthly on this resource, which constitutes about 15% to 20% of its nuclear fuel supply.

This dependency was manageable when Russia was not asserting its influence aggressively, providing a steady and affordable source of uranium. However, the current geopolitical landscape raises alarm bells, particularly following NATO’s sanctions against Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine, which led to Russia halting gas exports to Europe—an energy crisis that has significantly escalated energy costs and jeopardized economic stability.

To mitigate this crisis, the EU has intensified its focus on nuclear energy, with even Germany, traditionally opposed to nuclear power, extending the operational life of its reactors to navigate the energy shortfall.

The Dilemma of Dependence

On the surface, this pivot to nuclear power seems rational, as it maintains low emissions and allows for increased operational capacity without extensive modifications. However, the reliance on Russian enrichment, managed by the state-owned Rosatom, poses a substantial risk. This reliance not only funds Putin’s military endeavors but also exposes NATO to further intimidation, as Russia could threaten to cut off enriched uranium supplies, potentially triggering another energy crisis that could dissuade NATO from more robust involvement in Ukraine.

Compounding this issue, the US Department of Energy has indicated that enhancing domestic enrichment capabilities could cost billions and take years to establish, leaving NATO in a precarious situation.

France to the Rescue?

This is where France enters the picture. The French state-owned nuclear energy corporation, Orano, has announced plans to boost its enrichment facilities in France and the US by approximately 47%. This expansion is feasible and cost-effective, as it involves upgrading existing facilities rather than constructing new ones, allowing for a quicker and economically viable increase in uranium supply.

Orano’s planned 47% enhancement translates to an additional 3.5 million separating work units (SWU), which is a metric indicating the volume of U235 that can be extracted from raw uranium. In contrast, Russia currently operates at a capacity of 15 million SWU for both domestic use and exportation. While Orano’s expansion may not completely eliminate reliance on Russian enrichment, it could significantly reduce it.

The critical factor is that Orano must provide sufficient additional uranium to allow for a shift away from Russian sources without triggering a surge in nuclear energy prices, akin to the current natural gas market. If successful, Orano could enable NATO to diminish its dependence on Russian-enriched uranium.