Article

2005-02-18 Britain

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 Fred 2005-02-18 00:00:00|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 and there is always a discrepancy between the physical inventory and the book inventory

30 kilos? That's a mighty discrepancy. Some may due to rounding up while measuring--that I would understand. But that should be probably within range of +/- few hundred grams.

Posted by Sobiesky 2005-02-18 12:40:33 AM|| 2005-02-18 12:40:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Silkwood did it!

Posted by 3dc 2005-02-18 1:07:46 AM|| 2005-02-18 1:07:46 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Much like the missing U.S. plutonium in the 70s, which was stolen by the Israelis for their own bombs.

Posted by gromky 2005-02-18 1:27:11 AM|| 2005-02-18 1:27:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 How many Muslims work at Sellafield? That might answer the question.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2005-02-18 3:04:40 AM|| [http://www.slhess.com] 2005-02-18 3:04:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 SPoD, with this being in Europe, they don't need to be Muslim. "Anti-Zionists" of any stripe will do. Israel's existence is an outrage, afterall.

30 kg... this is a big deal. Somebody can't add, or somebody's been taking home leftovers.

Posted by Laurence of the Rats 2005-02-18 9:00:28 AM|| [http://htttp://www.punictreachery.com/] 2005-02-18 9:00:28 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 The plant in South Carolina has lost hundreds of pounds. Rocky Flats in Colorado had about 350 kg MUF. In 1996, the Department of Energy reported 2.8 metric tonnes of plutonium as "inventory differences" or MUF.

Remember, plutonium is dense, so 30 kilos isn't a large pile. Record keeping is the first point of failure. Math can often be the second. The plutonium is not in pure form, it's in with other radioactives. I'd carry pure plutonium in my pocket all day long. It's not that radioactive. The stuff you normally find it with, is. Stealing it would require the ability to handle deadly, highly radioactive substances. It's most likely an inventory error.

The Israelis, it is generally accepted, got much of the material for their nuke program by "acquiring" it from the Savannah River plant.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2005-02-18 9:09:53 AM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2005-02-18 9:09:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Homer Simpson took it home. And on his way home he took it out of his shirt and threw it out his car window.

Don't you people pay attention?

Posted by CrazyFool 2005-02-18 9:20:50 AM|| 2005-02-18 9:20:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 How big is 30 kgs of plutonium?

WHY is there always "a discrepancy between physical inventory and the book inventory"?

Posted by Jules 187 2005-02-18 9:26:15 AM|| 2005-02-18 9:26:15 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 It never hurts to have some extra bombs that aren't in the official count. Gives you options and plausible deniability.

Posted by Tom 2005-02-18 9:33:21 AM|| 2005-02-18 9:33:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 That would mean SOMEONE knows where it is, in which case this is simply muzzling (arguably, rightly so) reporting.

Do you think that is what has happened here?

Posted by Jules 187 2005-02-18 9:37:38 AM|| 2005-02-18 9:37:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 How big is 30 kgs of plutonium?

1 kg ~ 3 sq. in. so it's a cube around 4.5" per side unless I dropped a decimal somewhere in the mental arithmetic.

Posted by AzCat 2005-02-18 9:46:16 AM|| 2005-02-18 9:46:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 AzCat, that would be ~ 1.75" per side. I know... it's morning. Get some coffee brewin'. ;-)

Posted by Sobiesky 2005-02-18 10:05:21 AM|| 2005-02-18 10:05:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 it's that damn metric system conversion confusion...

Posted by Frank G 2005-02-18 10:06:25 AM|| 2005-02-18 10:06:25 AM|| Front Page Top

#14 So it would measure no bigger than your hand-or your pocket. Maybe it was stuffed down someone's pants or into their socks-that seems to be happening nowadays with FYEO documents...

Thanks, AzCat. So, seriously, how is plutonium contained when it is handled?

Posted by Jules 187 2005-02-18 10:15:48 AM|| 2005-02-18 10:15:48 AM|| Front Page Top

#15 I need some coffee and a junior high mathbook, apparently...;) I'll check back in later when fully awake.

Posted by Jules 187 2005-02-18 10:17:07 AM|| 2005-02-18 10:17:07 AM|| Front Page Top

#16 Sobiesky - It's not that early. ;)

3 sq. in. = 3" x 1" x 1"
so
30 x 3 sq in ~ 4.5" x 4.5" x 4.5"

Pu has a density of like 20,000 kg/m^3, unless it really is early if 30 kg were a 1.75" cube the density would be like 300,000 kg/m^3 but if 30 kg is more like a 4.5" cube it remains closer to 20,000 kg/m^3. :)

But Jules is ahead of both of us: it's pretty small.

Posted by AzCat 2005-02-18 10:29:33 AM|| 2005-02-18 10:29:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#17 The specific gravity of Pu is 19.84, so a cube 10 cm on a side would have a mass of 19.84 kg. A 30 kg cube would be about 11.45 cm on a side, or about 4.5 inches. AzCat is correct.

Posted by Biff Wellington 2005-02-18 10:35:54 AM|| 2005-02-18 10:35:54 AM|| Front Page Top

#18 Um. . . you said there would be no math on this quiz (whine).

Posted by Doc8404 2005-02-18 11:00:01 AM|| 2005-02-18 11:00:01 AM|| Front Page Top

#19 AzCat, misread, yea, itsa morning. Thought you refering to the size of 1kg cube (3 sq"), which would be ~ 1.732".

Posted by Sobiesky 2005-02-18 11:07:12 AM|| 2005-02-18 11:07:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#20 Let's talk about generally accepted accounting practices as they impact the shade leaf tobacco industry.

Posted by Shipman 2005-02-18 11:24:58 AM|| 2005-02-18 11:24:58 AM|| Front Page Top

#21 Oh, I don't know about that-motive and means are both of interest.

Posted by Jules 187 2005-02-18 11:28:51 AM|| 2005-02-18 11:28:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#22 So you could smuggle it out in you lead lined thermos bottle or lunchbox.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2005-02-18 11:30:12 AM|| [http://www.slhess.com] 2005-02-18 11:30:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#23 Damm it, in YOUR, lead lined...

I do need to get an appointment with the eye guy..

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2005-02-18 11:45:11 AM|| [http://www.slhess.com] 2005-02-18 11:45:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#24 30 kg is still 66 lbs. Would take more than a few pocket loads to carry.

Posted by john 2005-02-18 11:51:16 AM|| 2005-02-18 11:51:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#25 SPoD, only if the material is all in one place, you are allowed private access, you can get your lead-lined lunchbox into and out of the glovebox without being noticed, and then you can carry out a 30 kg (66 lbs) load plus lead lunchbox (150+ lbs total?) without being noticed by either guards or instruments. Better reinforce that lunchbox handle. Why not just go break into an underground ICBM silo -- you'd have about the same chance!

Posted by Tom 2005-02-18 11:54:40 AM|| 2005-02-18 11:54:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#26 I don't care how much is missing, so long as it's not enough to make a critical mass.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2005-02-18 11:59:55 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-02-18 11:59:55 AM|| Front Page Top

#27 It's enough to make about seven, IIUC...

Posted by Bulldog 2005-02-18 12:00:53 PM|| 2005-02-18 12:00:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 Bulldog, are you sure? I make it more like almost four.

OTOH, I'd use it in a dirty bomb. Much more effective. Plutonium is a highly toxic heavy metal poison.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2005-02-18 12:07:38 PM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2005-02-18 12:07:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 So, Chuck, what percentage of other radioactives do you usually find the Pu mised with? I'm trying to get a feel for what kind of typos you'd need. (If you've got a ton of some alloy that's 2.3% Pu and you wrote down 3.2% . . .)

Posted by James 2005-02-18 12:14:52 PM|| [http://www.idontknowbut.blogspot.com] 2005-02-18 12:14:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 Checked the Manhattan Project Heratige site. Fat Man had 13.6 pounds of plutonium, with a yield of 21 kilotons. 13.6/2.2 = 6.2 kilos. so about enough for 5 good sized bombs, give or take a little

Posted by Weird Al 2005-02-18 12:35:21 PM|| 2005-02-18 12:35:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 James: Plutonium decay series here.

Plutonium is created by neutron irradiation of uranium-238. It would be found in association with uranium and uranium decay products.

This plutonium began as part of nuclear fuel rods. The near aproximate amount of plutonium in each rod can be calculated, since the radiation exposure is known. As the rods are processed, the plutonium would be separated out [I believe]. The article doesn't spell out where the difference was found, but the math efforts above [much applause!] demonstrates that errors are quite possible in the calcs.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2005-02-18 1:21:17 PM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2005-02-18 1:21:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#32 I googled for info, found this, which suggests that for best Pu-239 purity you want rods irradidated for a short time. "Very short" they quote as giving 0.9%, so my random numbers weren't that far off. A little stoichiometric error could look pretty dramatic when you try to compare the Pu-239 you actually wound up with to what you thought you'd get.
Beautiful little understatement in the article: "Higher concentrations of Pu-240 can result in pre-detonation of the weapon, significantly reducing yield and reliability."

Posted by James 2005-02-18 2:23:34 PM|| [http://www.idontknowbut.blogspot.com] 2005-02-18 2:23:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#33 Metric system is very simple. You take a cube of 10 cm side (around 1/9th of a yard) and you fill it with pure water at 4 degrees Celsius (that is the temperature where water at its heaviest point). That cube will weigh exactly one kg. Plutonium has a densite of 19.8 so a cube of plutonium that size (10 cm) will weigh 19.8 kg and 30 kg of plutonium is a cube of 11.6 cm (1/8 th of a yard). It would fit into the hand of most men and a few women.

Posted by JFM 2005-02-18 2:44:23 PM|| 2005-02-18 2:44:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#34 NERDS! ;)

Posted by Chase Unineger3873 aka Jarhead 2005-02-18 2:51:37 PM|| 2005-02-18 2:51:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#35 JFM, That cube will weigh exactly one kg.

Hate being literalist..., but if I were not, I would never get anything to work. So...

That cube of water will weigh exactly one kg.

Posted by Sobiesky 2005-02-18 2:56:08 PM|| 2005-02-18 2:56:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#36 Has anyone seen Sandy Berger lately?

Posted by Seafarious 2005-02-18 3:11:10 PM|| 2005-02-18 3:11:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#37 Sobiesky

Fill with water a cube of, say glass, measuring 10 cm side. The difference in weight between the empty cube and the full one (ie nthe weight of the water) will be one kg.

In fact all the metric system is intertwined: scientists measured the perimeter of the earth divided it 40 million and defined the meter (they were slightly off target since the earth measures around 40,100 km instead of 40,000). A liter (volume unit) is the volume of cube of 1/10th of meter side. A kilogram is the weight of the water who would fit in that cube.

Posted by JFM 2005-02-18 3:57:09 PM|| 2005-02-18 3:57:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#38 JFM, glad you clarified it. ;-)

Yea, metric system is brilliant and is one and only positive thing that Frenchies can be credited for. Nothing else comes to mind.

Posted by Sobiesky 2005-02-18 4:12:34 PM|| 2005-02-18 4:12:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#39 When does "Radioactive Blondie" showup to say "Plutonium is hard!".

Posted by tu3031 2005-02-18 4:14:25 PM|| 2005-02-18 4:14:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#40 What's D in Metric?

Posted by Metric Blondie 2005-02-18 5:26:50 PM|| 2005-02-18 5:26:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#41 4. ;-)

Or you mean like in 'dm' (decimeter)?
10.

Posted by Sobiesky 2005-02-18 5:45:02 PM|| 2005-02-18 5:45:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#42 1/10 that is.

Posted by Sobiesky 2005-02-18 5:53:23 PM|| 2005-02-18 5:53:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#43 I'd give ya three steps, maybe, putting that in yer pocket Sandy

Posted by Frank G 2005-02-18 6:08:29 PM|| 2005-02-18 6:08:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#44 Or you mean like in 'dm' (decimeter)?

Probably more like 'dl' but you'd have to use multiples of 'em .... ;)

Posted by AzCat 2005-02-18 9:01:30 PM|| 2005-02-18 9:01:30 PM|| Front Page Top

23:31 Atomic Conspiracy
23:25 Phil Fraering
23:20 Sobiesky
23:19 DMFD
23:14 Phil Fraering
23:09 DMFD
23:08 JosephMendiola
23:06 Phil Fraering
23:05 Atomic Conspiracy
23:04 Phil Fraering
22:56 2b
22:54 trailing wife
22:53 Barbara Skolaut
22:49 CrazyFool
22:46 Eris
22:41 trailing wife
22:41 SwissTex
22:40 Jame Retief
22:39 trailing wife
22:33 JosephMendiola
22:20 badanov
22:20 trailing wife
22:19 SwissTex
22:14 Frank G