These are only the low cost uranium resources, typically in the range of less of 130 $/kg. This corresponds only to one $ per oil barrel equivalent. The nuclear fuel resources available at a cost of extracion of 10 or 20 $ per oil barrel equivalent are pratically renewables, almost infinite on a human scale, even with current and very inefficient nuclear technology based on ordinary or heavy water reactors, which use far less than 1% of the energy of uranium. At today uranium price, current nuclear technologies prevail

Nor indeed exist a "Yucca Mountain peak", all the transuranics in the nuclear waste can be reused and recycled (and eliminated) with enormous energy savings

This reference is a red herring in that all of its numbers rely on the statement, “assuming a once-through cycle”. The only reason we follow this cycle is natural uranium is so low in cost, and a presidential directive back in the 1970s banned it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reprocessing If the cost of uranium rises enough reprocessing will become viable again. Another reason this is a specious argument is that Thorium fueled reactors can produce aproximatly 400 times as much energy as Uranium in thermal reactors, http://thoriumenergy.blogspot.com/ . This gives us plenty of energy for a thousand years even assuming an increase in energy usage each year.

Actually, if the rate of U extraction is at or below the rate of ore body generation by natural processes then it IS renewable, or as much so as geothermal, for instance.

Just as oil is renewable at a certain extraction rate - at least 100 barallels a day(!!) worldwide.

And if you properly reprocess and breed, then the average 30-year half-life of the end state waste means that your waste pile has a finite size.

And it's not a renewable however you figure it.

Nothing is renewable in this universe. If you don't like it, find another Universe where the second law of thermodynamics doesn't apply.