Study Finds No Need for LES Plant In Hartsville
By: John Hepler
With Following Introduction by Gary Bowers, State Conservation Chair
Middle TN Group Hosts Controversial Hartsville Uranium Enrichment Facility Meeting by Gary Bowers-Conservation Chair-TN Chapter
Long time Sierra Club member, and anti-nuclear activist, Faith Young of Hartsville, and anti-nuclear activist John Helper of Whitleyville presented the Middle Tennessee Group’s November program meeting. Each spoke eloquently regarding the reasons why the plant should not be built.
The first question that these activists say needs to be addressed is. "Is there a need for the plant to be built?" In the article following, John Hepler makes a very persuasive argument using economics to prove that the need for this plant does not exist.
For information on the status of the proposed Hartsville uranium enrichment facility, or actions you can take to support the opposition of the construction of this facility, please contact Terry Sweeton with Citizens for Smart Choices in Hartsville at 615/300-4172 or go to the website http://www.stoples.org/lesintro.htm.
The Middle Tennessee Group has voted to oppose the building of this plant. The Tennessee Chapter will resume consideration the question at the next Chapter meeting at the end of January.
Hartsville, Tennessee
- The nuclear processing plant proposed by Louisiana Energy Services for Hartsville looks like a clean, profitable business. LES' gas centrifuge process is certainly a more efficient way to enrich uranium than the old technology used in the Paducah Gas Diffusion Plant. But the whole truth is much darker. A close look at the nuclear fuel industry reveals a fatal flaw in the rosy LES picture: The chronic oversupply of uranium.In 1993, four years after the fall of the Soviet Union, the new/old nation of Russia was ready to deal: for 12 billion US dollars, Russia sold us 500 tons of hot, highly enriched weapons grade uranium (also called HEU). Both Russia and the US had still have far more nuclear bomb materiel than either would ever need. The Russia nuclear industry is struggling with shortages of jobs, housing and shrinking pay. Their desperation for cash makes this situation extremely dangerous since there is always black market demand for this uranium for bombs.
This arrangement-- called Megatons to Megawatts-- is possible because most nuclear weapons are made of uranium (U-235), enriched to 93%. This same material, when "downblended" to 4% U-235, powers over half of the US nuclear energy industry today. The Russians are paid to downblend this highly enriched uranium into fuel, giving them more money and allowing for shipments of a much safer, though still dangerous, radioactive material. About 50 to 60 tons of HEU, depending on rate of downblend, would run the entire US nuclear industry for one year.
Bombs into Plowshares
This sounds like an ideal situation: the Russians will gradually melt down their bombs and get much needed money to ease their financial pressures. This project not only removes this dangerous material from circulation and off the black market, but recycling these bombs decreases our national need to produce more nuclear reactor fuel.
But reality is not that easy. Globally, the uranium industry has a production capacity 8% greater than demand. European producers have successfully stopped Russian commercial exports to the US. And Russia is not enthusiastic about further sales of downblended HEU at low prices.
The current uranium oversupply is reinforced by the glut of weapons-grade uranium waiting in the wings. The huge US and Russian stockpiles of HEU could easily power all U.S. reactors for the rest of their working lives.
Even the 800-pound gorilla of the US nuclear fuel industry is uneasy. The US Enrichment Corporation (USEC) is a quasi-government corporation that now runs the Paducah enrichment plant and controls the incoming Russian fuel. As sole agent of the US government, USEC is supposed to be "balancing its commercial interests with the national security interests of the USA." But the USEC says its "priority is to remain a profitable commercial venture and maintain maximum value to its shareholders." Even so, they are struggling with the inefficient Paducah plant, and their stock market valuation is not high.
National Security vs. Market Pricing
US national security interests call for as much bomb-grade uranium as possible to be bought, downblended and stored so it cannot be used for bombs. This seems pretty simple, but its not happening.
Why not?
First, low uranium prices on the world market keep the Russians from wanting to sell more weapons grade HEU. Second, USEC, the sole purchasing agent for this material, is in business to make a profit.
In other words, excessive faith in the "magic of the market" is shoving our national security concerns to the back of the line.
And this market is hardly free. As one analyst put it, "Russian sales must be handled . . . in a way that does not disrupt the market." Nuclear fuel prices, like coal and oil prices, are maintained by a tacit agreement-- collusion-- of the nuclear fuel producers to maintain a level of uranium prices that keep the nuclear fuel industry profitable.
The US Government should offer Russia premium prices for downblended HEU whenever it is available.
The US nuclear power industry may look robust now but it is likely die in 25 or 30 years, as nuclear power plants reach the end of their working lives. They will be replaced with more efficient energy consumption, cheaper wind power, and new solar technologies.
Meanwhile, the US and global nuclear fuel industry has an excess of uranium, even while the downblending of HEU proceeds at a snail's pace. Russia sits on hundreds of tons of fissile uranium, while the US government relies on the shabby magic of the un-free market to resolve a global security crisis. Every ton of new reactor fuel produced keeps 70 pounds of Russian bomb-grade uranium cheaper, and more readily available to global terrorists.
Profitable Operation in a Market Glut
How could LES-Urenco profitably operate an enrichment plant in Hartsville during a global uranium glut?
First, they can enrich UF6 more cheaply than the already operating Paducah plant. Second, they hope that 100 more nuclear power plants will be built in the USA, according to the Bush/Cheney plan. Third, enrichment is so profitable that plant investment can be recouped quickly. And fourth, LES can make money in a down market due to vertical integration-- its partners' control would begin in the Cameco mines, and end in the BNFL fuel finishing plant in Charleston, SC to before being sold to its partner-customers Duke, Exelon and Westinghouse.
The operation of the LES nuclear fuel plant in Hartsville will simply add to the global glut of uranium and the availability of uranium in the world market place. The LES plant is not needed and should not be built.
**********************************************************************************************
References:
David Albright et al, World Inventory of Plutonium and Highly Enriched Uranium, 1992; Oxford University Press 1993
Norman E Brandon (Nuclear Fuel Services, Erwin, TN), "Enrichment Blending: an Overview and Analysis", presented to US Council for Energy Awareness International Enrichment Conference, June 14, 1993
Clark Beyer and Jeff Combs, "URANIUM ENRICHMENT: A DISTORTED MARKET", Nuclear Engineering International; September 30, 2002
Arjun Makhijani and Annie Makhijani, "Fissile Materials: Technical and Policy Aspects of the Disposition of Plutonium and Highly Enriched Uranium"; IEER Press 1995
National Academy of Sciences, "Management and Disposition of Excess Weapons Plutonium," Committee on International Security and Arms Control, Washington DC, 1994
Energy Information Administration, "Uranium Industry Annual, 2001"; US Dept of Energy, May 2002
U. S. General Accounting Office, "Nuclear Nonproliferation: Implications of the US Purchase of Russian Highly Enriched Uranium"; Report to Commerce Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, December 2000
