Well, "By the end of the century" is almost 80 years away, that is significantly longer than any normal nuclear power plant lasts.

Also it is very difficult to know which exact price someone pays for uranium because they normal dont buy on the spot market, but via long lasting contracts.

So from my point of view we don't have sufficient information for a proper estimation of the situation.

The real key factor is as the cost of uranium continues to go up and suffers potential shortages and supply issues the cost of installing solar and wind continues to drop - they got planning permission for a solar farm near me about a year ago and it's already half way through having pannels installed, the speed they can do it is only going to keep increasing especially as more automated tools get developed. Then there's the almost certainty of a breakthrough in chemistry reaching market which significant reduces cost and increases the range of locations suitable which would again drastically lower price per kWh while the price of running nukes continues to rise and they're locked into decades of economic loss or they'll choose to close them and all that investment and effort will be for nothing.

@Wirrvogel @CAVOK Uranium is not really finite. There is an upper limit to its cost, when it becomes commercially viable to extract it from sea water, which itself leeches it from the entire earth's surface. But before that, there are enough options, as uranium is much more ubiquitous, and more evenly distributed about the world than oil — and peak oil hasn't really happened either yet, despite forecasts for decades.

it's just not something you can extract easily in countries that care about their citizens so it'll always come from a shitty place

First two countries for known reserves are Australia and Canada, together they hold around 40% of all the uranium reserves of the planet. Uranium could also be extracted from seawater, obviously at a much higher price.

It's just that it's easier to extract it where exploitation rights for land is cheap. But that's unfortunately also true for many materials we need for renewables

Usually this community is full of them even in threads only talking about renewables.

I think you have to mention Germany and energy in the title to summon them.

This is one of the main problems with atomic energy that we haven’t got any idea how to use

Doesn't this apply to almost any form of power generation? Fossil fuels and raw materials for nuclear fuels are often imported from undemocratic or unstable countries. As are many of the raw materials required for renewable power generation and storage.

Using this as an argument againt nuclear power is as intellectually dishonest as the people using it as an argument against electric cars.