It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Resource Strategist Warns of New Threat: “It Would Be the Greatest Blackout in American History"

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   
By enacting such sanctions, US and Europe are destroying the very fabric of international relations.

This will lead nowhere. In the end, nobody stands to win.

U.S. uranium "pie":


Uranium mining by country

Europe's same "problem":




You have to remember the facts… You can talk about hope and dreams all you want, but the reality is that one in every five homes in America is powered by Russian fuel.



SHTFp lan
edit on 20-5-2014 by maghun because: too long subject, cut out "Russia"




posted on May, 20 2014 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: maghun

We can just buy more from other sources. I dont see the need to humor Russia when they only provide 20% of our nuclear fuel. That is not terribly important considering that plenty of other players have it and would be willing to pick up their slack. We probably GAVE them that deal to help bolster their economy after they were asking the west for aid and trade deals after their little collapse.


How did we get along without them during the cold war?


edit on 5 20 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   
When they built the power plants, it actually increased our power consumption in this country. We got more dependent on power to do everything. We do not need an electric canopener to open a can. We do not need hairdryers to dry our hair. They used to keep brushing and fluffing it before. Now they dry out all the oils out of it with shampoos and it takes a long time to dry.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 10:59 AM
link   
I recently saw a figure that showed how the queen of England controlled a near monopoly on the worlds uranium? Anyone else? That's why they could afford the Chobham armor for the British and American tanks. If that's true, pretty sure it is, then what's your point, OP?



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 10:59 AM
link   
So Obama is trying to eliminate coal, and we will not have nuclear. Hhmm. That's a problem.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Yeah, here you go.....

www.nationofchange.org...

How's this fit that B.S.?

Blow it out your ass, Russia. Nice try though.
edit on 20-5-2014 by SenterSun because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: maghun

We can just buy more from other sources. I dont see the need to humor Russia when they only provide 20% of our nuclear fuel. That is not terribly important considering that plenty of other players have it and would be willing to pick up their slack. We probably GAVE them that deal to help bolster their economy after they were asking the west for aid and trade deals after their little collapse.


How did we get along without them during the cold war?



Only about 20%?
Rethink that... 20% disappearing from any market makes the industry much more difficult to work within.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: 0bservant

Because we are not talking total supply. We are saying that we give them 20% of our business and let them serve 20% of our demand. There are other suppliers.

The market will only suffer on their end while making someone else REALLY happy. We diversify the sources for important stuff like this for a reason.

"Hey Canada how would you like to sell us twice as much? Cool.

But hey 40% of our total uranium supply is too much to depend on a foreign power, so we will just divide this 20% slack among the plethora of other providers."

Everyone is happy.

done.

edit on 5 20 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   
The US and Europe can buy 2% more from each of their suppliers.

Problem solved.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   
I can see it now.

Obama: "I think it must have been around last Friday when we first heard about the blackout on the White House hand crank radio."

Uranium is only the tip of this iceberg. We share half the world with Russia.

Schoolyard fights happen in exactly the same way.

You'll know WW3 is close at hand when these politicians start talking about each other's mammas.
edit on 20-5-2014 by Quauhtli because: ...



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

Given the growing demand for electricity and the number of new reactor builds planned, it is likely that the markets for uranium will only grow fiercer, placing the U.S. in a precarious position indeed if it does not develop domestic uranium deposits.



Uranium: Global Demand Growing, Shortages Possible



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Look at all those African countries in that first pie chart. The French are there, too.


Like its neighbor, Niger, Mali is rich in a number of resources, including uranium. Following the ‘oil shock’ of 1973 in which the oil producing nations sharply increased the price of oil, the French decided an alternative route was needed. This alternative was nuclear energy, and over the 15 years following the shock, France built 56 nuclear reactors, more than any other country in the world. France now has 59 nuclear reactors, generating nearly 80% of its electricity, making it the world’s largest net electricity exporter. In 1999, the French parliament confirmed three objectives in relation to this newly found wealth, the first: security of supply.

The War on Terror in Mali for Uranium



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: maghun

Russia produces 5% of the world supply according to your source. That says it all. Between Canada and Australia we would be fine...or any other combination of suppliers.

Many of those suppliers are our allies or dont care either way beyond a profit.


edit on 5 20 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: maghun

Russia produces 5% of the world supply according to your source. That says it all. Between Canada and Australia we would be fine...or any other combination of suppliers.

Many of those suppliers are our allies or dont care either way beyond a profit.



Yep, Russia only produces 5% of the global supply, but if things heat up, you can add the 4% from Uzbekistan and the 35& from Kazakhstan. You can bet those two countries will prefer tensions with the US and EU to tensions with neighboring Russia!

Then we would be cut off from 45% of the global supply.

And that is going to be a pretty large chunk, when everybody all of a sudden scrambles to get their supply from the remaining 55%.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman

Russia produces 5% of the world supply according to your source. That says it all. Between Canada and Australia we would be fine...or any other combination of suppliers.

Many of those suppliers are our allies or dont care either way beyond a profit.


US just snaps her fingers, and her allies say, "how high?"...




posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: maghun

not to let reality get in the way - but the claim :


but the reality is that one in every five homes in America is powered by Russian fuel.


is so disingenuous it hurts

the reality is tha nuclear power only provides 19 % of US domestic electricity

and the Russian federation provides 20% of US uranium demand

even if we exclude all other uses for uranium and pretend that all Russian uranium ends up in civilian power generation reactors

that's 4% MAXIMUM of US domestic power generated from Russian uranium



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: peck420

I never said that. We work hand in hand with our allies, hence the western hegemony we ALL enjoy.

Do I smell a hint of hatred for the US? LOL



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: DupontDeux

if 5% can supply 20% of our needs as well as other buyers, then 55 % can well supply our needs well into the future.

I really dont see the problem. They dont like our money, OK! Plenty of others do!



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
I never said that. We work hand in hand with our allies, hence the western hegemony we ALL enjoy.

Then please explain where excess supply will come from, in a market that is currently servicing only 90% of market demand?

Whose contract will be sacrificed? France? Japan? China?

Maybe we can just open more mines...but, I am going to state flat out, that the countries, that are already on the waiting list for us to do that, are going to be really mad.


Do I smell a hint of hatred for the US? LOL

Nope, my hatred for arrogance is global. And, yes, assuming that your 'allies' will just cancel contracts, with other trade partners, to service your needs, is arrogant.




edit on 20-5-2014 by peck420 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-5-2014 by peck420 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:26 PM
link   
FFS
edit on 20-5-2014 by peck420 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join