Article

2004-10-06 Europe

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mark Espinola 2004-10-06 8:07:56 AM|| || Front Page|| [11135 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Ah, you just have to love AP stories. An error a sentence, that's all we ask.

First, plutonium is not highly radioactive. If it were, it'd be useless in nuclear weapons since it would decay away too fast.

Second, there's no such thing as weapons grade plutonium. That's why plutonium is such a risky commodity; all its isotopes are fissile and don't require enrichment. Uranium, on the other hand, requires enrichment.

Third, if one wishes to invoke the ghost of atomic weapons past, then it would be more appropriate to refer back to the bomb (Fat Man) that levelled Nagasaki since that used plutonium, not the one that was used on Hiroshima.

Finally, there's no better way of getting rid of plutonium than using it as fuel in a civilian reactor.

Posted by Dreadnought 2004-10-06 3:27:16 PM|| 2004-10-06 3:27:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 swords into plowshares and all that.

Posted by eLarson 2004-10-06 3:41:10 PM|| [http://larsonian.blogspot.com] 2004-10-06 3:41:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Bon appetit, monsieurs et madames!

Posted by tu3031 2004-10-06 3:48:37 PM|| 2004-10-06 3:48:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 "The U.S. Energy Department must ship the plutonium overseas for conversion because there isnât a plant in the United States that can do it."

Thank you Jimmy Carter. He cancelled our reprocessing plans so as to Set A Moral Example so that other countries wouldn't. So, now we have all the high-level waste storage problems.

But at least our moral example has inspired Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, India, ... to not develop any weaponizable technologies.

Idiot.

Posted by jackal 2004-10-06 4:01:37 PM|| [http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2004-10-06 4:01:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 If you liked Jimmuh you'll love Kerry. Even the Iranian foreign minister had to laugh out loud at Kerry's latest proposal.

Posted by lex 2004-10-06 4:09:43 PM|| 2004-10-06 4:09:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Jackal,

Your indictment of Jimmah is correct in spirit, but not quite relevant in this case.

Carter's action prevented us from extracting plutonium from spent commercial reactor fuel. The non-fissile U-238 in the commercial fuel accounts for 96-98% of the uranium and transforms to plutonium after neutron capture. When a reactor shuts down to refuel, there is a fair amount of plutonium remaining in the rods.

In the case presented here, these are warheads that are being retired, so there is no real reprocessing issue. Just a question of what to do with a pile of plutonium.

Frankly, I'm not sure if that's we can't mix the fuel or we just aren't allowed by law. I'm inclined to think the latter because accounting for plutonium in the reactivity calculations is no big deal.

Posted by Dreadnought 2004-10-06 4:14:13 PM|| 2004-10-06 4:14:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Thanks, DN. I must have MEGO'ed the "warhead" part. Too bad we took the suckers apart. We could have done Kerry's "nuclear material to Iran" proposal by Minuteman.

Posted by jackal 2004-10-06 8:31:35 PM|| [http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2004-10-06 8:31:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 "nuclear material to Iran" proposal by Minuteman.

It's a lot faster than shipping by sea. Two birds with one stone.

Posted by Poison Reverse 2004-10-06 10:14:28 PM|| 2004-10-06 10:14:28 PM|| Front Page Top

10:10 Antiwar
05:49 Antiwar
05:48 Antiwar
10:09 Antiwar
05:52 Antiwar
05:53 Antiwar
09:21 Antiwar
09:19 Antiwar
09:18 Antiwar
09:28 Antiwar
09:25 Antiwar
09:23 Antiwar
15:52 lex
15:24 Joseph L.
07:03 MendoScot
06:27 Howard UK
06:01 Memesis
05:34 Sock Puppet of Doom
05:28 Memesis
05:14 Sock Puppet of Doom
05:12 Sock Puppet of Doom
05:07 Memesis
05:05 Bryan
04:55 Matt Helm