Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

Storing wind-generated energy as gravitational potential energy? - Page 31

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by Neon John on December 12, 2008, 1:37 pm
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 04:20:30 -0800 (PST), Andy Dingley

Over here in the US MOX technology started off intending to use civilian Pu.
the massive stockpile of weapon Pu after the end of the cold war has modified
that thinking.  According to what I hear and read, the intent now is to mix
the weapon Pu with waste (civilian) Pu to "denature" it as far as bomb use
goes.  Then bring the denatured product into the MOX (experimental at this
point) stream.

Same situation with HEU.  Denature it enough with DU to make not a
proliferation risk (which is a chimera anyway) and then incorporate it into
the fuel cycle.

ON the proliferation myth.  It is just that, a myth, another strawman used by
the anti-nukes.  As more papers get declassified or leaked (I LOVE Wikileaks)
we are learning that not a single minor nuclear state has done it without help
from one or more of the major nuclear powers.  N. Korea from the fUSSR.  S.
Africa from the Israelis and the French.  The Israelis themselves from us.
Etc.  Many of us nukes have long alleged that it is a practical impossibility
to make a weapon from proliferated duel use materials such as reactor fuel.
History is showing that no one has eve tried.  Even though horrifically
difficult and expensive, building enrichment plants or production reactors are
much simpler and cheaper routes.

John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johndearmond.com  <-- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain to eat vegetables!

Posted by The Natural Philosopher on December 12, 2008, 2:05 pm
Neon John wrote:

Yes. Although the S African's and the Isrealis were much helped by
Europe a well as by the US.

The main worry about proliferation seem to be

- fear and panic with a conventional explosion scattering e.g. used fuel

- countries with reactor ability being able to  make breeder reactors.

- countries with refining technlogy being able to refine to high
standards weapons grade.

The first is countered with proper security around nuclear material, and
in essence a dirty bomb isn't that destructive anyway. Its not 911 class

The other two are catered for by supplying processed fuel to the
countries. And making sure the stations aren't breeders.

Or have I missed something?

Its a bit like guns., Don't ban the guns, Control the ammunition ;-) Its
harder to make (good) ammunition than a gun.

Posted by harry on December 12, 2008, 8:40 pm
addresshttp://www.neon-john.comhttp://www.johndearmond.com<--  best little blog
on the net!

So, who helped the Indians and the Pakis?  Not to mention Saddam.

Posted by Neon John on December 13, 2008, 6:30 am

fUSSR for the Indians.  No idea on the Pakis.  Since Saddam didn't come even
close, he doesn't count.  I suppose that you could say that we did in a way,
since he was trying to duplicate the Manhattan project, complete with


John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johndearmond.com  <-- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
If the letters PhD appear after a person's name, that person will
remain outdoors even after it's started raining.

Posted by The Natural Philosopher on December 13, 2008, 7:31 am
 Neon John wrote:



Saddam's efforts were all about making it APPEAR he had capabilities
that he did not.

And certain people wanting to believe him. Or finding it politically

Pakistan? possible china helped, or they had good intel and got the help
they needed without authorisation.

The point is it wasn't the west's nuclear power stations that were in
any way involved.

This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
please rate this thread