The Paradox of Dependency: Why the West Can't Shake Russian Nuclear Fuel
Written on
Chapter 1: Putin's Nuclear Influence
The unthinkable occurred just over a year ago when Putin and his allies launched an invasion of Ukraine. Since that moment, the courageous citizens of Ukraine have fought tenaciously, even managing to push back against Russian forces. This was made possible, in part, by Western support that provided Ukraine with enhanced weaponry. Additionally, Western sanctions have significantly hampered the Russian economy. The West has effectively boycotted Russia’s fossil fuel sector and has frozen or seized billions in Russian assets. Yet, one crucial commodity remains stubbornly tied to Russia: nuclear fuel. According to the European Space Agency (ESA), Russia’s state-owned Rosatom supplies approximately 40% of the EU's uranium imports, translating to about a billion dollars in nuclear fuel services that continue to bolster Putin’s military operations. This raises a critical question: why is the West so reliant on Russian nuclear fuel?
The Basics of Nuclear Fuel Dependency
The Cold War left Russia with substantial nuclear infrastructure. While Russia contributes only a small percentage of the world's raw uranium supply, it dominates over half of the global enrichment services. Uranium cannot simply be extracted and utilized directly in reactors; modern nuclear reactors require a specific isotope known as U-235. However, U-235 constitutes merely 0.7% of natural uranium, and reactors need it enriched to around 5%. This enrichment process is intricate and costly, making it essential for producing usable nuclear fuel.
Although the United States and the European Union possess their own enrichment facilities, these are significantly more expensive than those in Russia. Consequently, when relations were stable, it was logical for the West to utilize Russian nuclear fuel, leading to a gradual decline in domestic enrichment capacity. However, this dynamic shifted dramatically following Russia's military actions in Ukraine.
While several EU nations, including Germany, Sweden, and the Netherlands, have successfully transitioned away from Russian nuclear supplies, many Central and Eastern European countries—such as Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary—face challenges due to their reliance on Soviet-era VVER reactors, which can only be fueled by Russian sources.
The Continued Use of Russian VVER Reactors
Russia not only continues to manufacture VVER reactors but has also modernized their design over the years. These reactors are currently the most widely used pressurized water reactors due to their competitive pricing and impressive efficiency. Moreover, Russia offers attractive financing and fuel packages for these reactors, with the EU operating 18 of them. The latest addition is Slovakia’s Mochovce 3 VVER reactor, for which Russia is contracted to supply fuel until 2026.
The specificity of reactor fuel requirements complicates matters. Each reactor has distinct needs for fuel rods in terms of chemical composition, shape, and safety features. Currently, no other supplier offers fuel that meets the stringent specifications for VVER reactors at a commercial scale. Although Westinghouse, a US nuclear fuel provider, aims to create VVER-compatible fuel, significant investment and time are required for it to become viable in the market.
Even if Westinghouse succeeds, it wouldn't liberate Europe from its reliance on Russian nuclear fuel. When a country acquires a VVER reactor, it typically enters into a leasing-like arrangement. Russia provides financing for the reactor, and part of the agreement mandates that Rosatom remains the sole fuel supplier for a specified duration. This arrangement is appealing, allowing nations to secure nuclear power at a reasonable cost with guaranteed fuel supply through manageable monthly payments. However, should a country breach this agreement, Russia retains the right to terminate the deal and disable the reactor, much like a car manufacturer reclaiming a leased vehicle.
Consequently, when the EU contemplated sanctions on Russian nuclear supplies, it quickly recognized the impracticality of such measures. Central and Eastern Europe had long relied on their nuclear reactors to sustain energy grids. With existing sanctions on Russian natural gas and other fossil fuels already triggering an energy crisis across Europe, the EU cannot afford to jeopardize its nuclear reactors.
The Hypocrisy of Dependency
This dependency on Russian nuclear fuel has led to considerable financial resources flowing into Putin's military endeavors, a situation that was not accidental. Putin, fully aware of NATO's military superiority, has crafted a strategy to bind the West to his nuclear industry, ensuring that we would never pose a threat to his outdated expansionist ambitions. This has resulted in a mafia-like grip over our nuclear energy sector, allowing us to become addicted to affordable energy at the expense of energy security. As a result, both we and the beleaguered citizens of Ukraine are paying the price for this oversight.
The first video discusses the implications of NATO's nuclear capabilities in the context of the ongoing conflict, highlighting how Putin must consider the consequences of escalating tensions.
The second video explores the looming threat of nuclear confrontation and whether the West is inadvertently pushing Putin towards a more aggressive stance.