I wonder why the NYTs went with the order of the counties in the sentence? The assumption is Australia exports the most uranium to the USA. I get it now, they went by alphabetical order. It this order really fair? Russia exports the most uranium into the USA. Do you really think our nuclear plants are really powered by American uranium? This is a shot at Russia. Some high 90% of the uranium powering our nuclear plants are powered up by Russian uranium. This problem emanates from the megawatts to megaton (US and Russia's nuclear weapons non proliferation agreement. Basically we bought Russia's weapon uranium to fuel up our nuclear plant. It was really cheap fuel. I wrote about the extensively on my blog. So recently the MTW agreement transitioned to a commercial venture. We really never knew where the ratepayer billions went into Russia. They are really thugs. The world wide money grubbers owned this program. I always thought with US permission, newly mined uranium was put into this agreement.
By Ana Swanson and Brad Plumer
July 18, 2018
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration said on Wednesday that it was starting an investigation into uranium imports, potentially opening another front in an expansive trade war that has shaken alliances with countries around the world.
Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary, said the department would investigate whether imported uranium ore and related products — key ingredients in America’s nuclear arsenal, and used in power production and nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers — threatened national security.
Uranium produced domestically now fills only 5 percent of America’s needs, Mr. Ross said, down from half in 1987.
The uranium inquiry is the latest of several trade-related steps the Trump administration has taken with an eye toward imposing stiff tariffs on imports. Levies have already been placed on washing machines, solar-power products, steel and aluminum from overseas, and on an array of Chinese goods. The administration is also considering whether to impose tariffs on imported cars and car parts.
The investigation announced on Wednesday was requested by two American uranium mining companies, UR-Energy and Energy Fuels. The firms say low-priced imports, especially those from competitors supported by foreign government subsidies, had caused them to slash jobs in recent years. Nuclear power producers have responded by warning that sharp restrictions on uranium imports could lead to the closure of plants.
“Despite uranium’s critical role in supporting clean electricity and national defense, imports of cheap, foreign state-subsidized uranium have swelled,” the companies wrote in a petition in January. Shares of both companies rose on Wednesday.
The uranium imported into the United States now comes
As far as the NTYs, over decades they were complicate with this crooked deal. I think the US utilities, the NYTs and our government coverup'ed how highly we used Russian uranium. It is a top secret coverup. The simple question is, for each US nuclear plant, what percentage of plant power comes from the Russian uranium? How much nuclear plant power nationwide comes from Russian uranium? Again in the high 90 percent. Basically the only reason our nuclear plants were profitable for the last few decades is they use cheap Russian uranium.
Think of the grid and utility crisis we would be in if they cut off selling uranium to us? All the financial value with all the nuclear plants would disappear overnight. We would lose 20% of the grid capacity fairly quickly.
mostly from Australia, Canada, Kazakhstan and Russia.
The nuclear power industry has warned that an aggressive attempt to restrict access to imported uranium could increase the cost of operating America’s nuclear power plants, many of which already struggle to compete with lower-price natural gas and renewable energy.
Nuclear power provides 20 percent of America’s electricity, a fraction that is set to wane in the coming years: Since 2013, six of the nation’s nuclear reactors have shut down permanently and 11 others are scheduled to be retired by 2025.
President Trump, who often talks about the benefits of nuclear power, has ordered the energy secretary, Rick Perry, to “prepare immediate steps” to stem the closure of reactors. But new trade barriers on nuclear fuel couldfurther strain the industry.
“Maintaining all the elements of the domestic uranium fuel supply is in our national interest and we urge the federal government to take appropriate action, without harming the fleet of nuclear reactors,” Maria G. Korsnick, head of the Nuclear Energy Institute, said in a statement.
The companies that requested the trade case asked that the Commerce Department limit imports so that 25 percent of the uranium used in the United States would be produced domestically. The companies argue that doing so would pose minimal burdens on nuclear power plants.
The companies that operate the plants dispute that idea, pointing to a recent study from NorthBridge Group, a consulting firm, that looked at the impact of such a quota, which would require domestic producers to expand their operations sharply in just a few years. Doing so would cost the nuclear power industry $500 million to $800 million per year, the study found, increasing the average cost of electricity from nuclear reactors by around 2 to 3 percent.
“We sympathize with the plight of uranium suppliers,” Ms. Korsnick said on Wednesday. “However, NEI does not support the implementation of quotas as described in the petition. Potential remedies could put even more generating units at risk for premature closure.”
It is unclear what the Trump administration will ultimately propose with regard to imported uranium. If it determines that unfair trade practices are hurting domestic mining companies, the Commerce Department can recommend a broad range of remedies, from strict quotas to temporary tariffs. Such a decision would be expected to play out over several months, as the department continues its investigation and holds public hearings.
The investigation into uranium imports — as with those involving steel, aluminum cars and car parts — is being conducted under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, a legal provision that gives the president broad power to impose tariffs on imports that he determines pose a threat to national security.
The use of a national security-related law to place tariffs on close military allies like Canada and the European Union has been a source of contention. Multiple countries have retaliated by imposing tariffs on American goods and have challenged the Trump administration’s measures at the World Trade Organization.
In particular, trade experts say that the administration’s imposition of tariffs for national security reasons — a matter the World Trade Organization does not closely regulate — opens a potential loophole that other countries could use to put their own levies on a range of products.
“If the U.S. has rewritten the rules of the WTO system to say you can do anything you want if it’s in your national security interests, be prepared for every country in the world to come up with a new definition of what is its critical national security interest,” Rufus Yerxa, the president of the National Foreign Trade Council, which represents exporters in the United States, said.
Congress has considered taking action to stay the administration’s use of the national security provision to impose tariffs. Republican leaders have shown limited support for such a move so far, but that could change as the administration’s trade measures become more far-reaching.
“If the administration continues forward with its misguided and reckless reliance on tariffs, I will work to advance trade legislation to curtail presidential trade authority,” Senator Orrin Hatch, Republican of Utah and the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said Tuesday. “I am discussing legislative options with colleagues both on and off the Finance Committee and I will continue to do so.”
No comments:
Post a Comment