International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 23 Jan 2009 05:03

US Air Force nuclear and cyber sites released

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 23 Jan 2009 05:05

Swiss Officials blast handling of nuclear secrets case

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 23 Jan 2009 06:49

Gerard wrote:Swiss Officials blast handling of nuclear secrets case

Another dog and pony show.. for public consumption..

renukb · Post by **renukb** » 23 Jan 2009 09:35

Regional Nuclear War and the Environment
http://www.time.com/time/health/article ... 64,00.html

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 25 Jan 2009 01:36

North Korea claims it's seen as nuclear power

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 25 Jan 2009 18:52

Plutonium found in safe at Hanford is historic

Researchers at the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland traced its origins to the first batch of weapons-grade materials ever processed at Hanford.

It's also the second oldest known man-made plutonium 239, said Jon Schwantes, a PNNL senior research scientist who led the investigation. The oldest is held in the Smithsonian.

The time frame in which the plutonium originated was further narrowed by studying the ratio of plutonium to uranium in the sample, since plutonium decays over time into uranium.

That put the probable date of creation at 1945, give or take 4.5 years. The latest the plutonium could have been made was about 1950.

But an analysis of the minor plutonium isotopes was puzzling.

Irradiating fuel for weapons production produces not only plutonium 239, the type used in weapons, but also plutonium 238, 240, 241 and 242. Determining the ratio between the amounts of different isotopes created a "fingerprint" of the reactor that produced it.

That fingerprint matched a reactor that operated at a power of 3.7 megawatt days per metric ton of uranium.

B Reactor and the two other Hanford reactors operating in the mid-1940s were 200 MWd/MTU reactors, Schwantes said. There was one other possibility, a research reactor that produced plutonium 239 in the 1940s. The X-10 reactor in Oak Ridge, Tenn., was a prototype for production-scale reactors later built at Hanford.

Its power at 3.6 MWd/MTU was close enough to be a match.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 26 Jan 2009 04:29

Uranium nations urged not to sell to Iran

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Jan 2009 02:27

Janitor pleads guilty in Tenn. nuclear parts theft

Oakley acted alone in trying to sell a handful of uranium enrichment parts first to the French government and then an undercover FBI agent for $200,000 in cash, Assistant U.S. Attorney Will Mackie said.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Jan 2009 02:28

Obama's Showdown over Nuclear Weapons

The latest U.S. nuclear showdown doesn't involve a foreign enemy. Instead it pits President Barack Obama against his Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, and concerns the question of whether America needs a new generation of nuclear warheads.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Jan 2009 03:11

Gerard any news about new UK sub?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Jan 2009 04:31

The proposed new class of SSBNs? That has to wait until the US produces the new SLBM. It is not an independent decision by the UK. Their entire missile arsenal comes from a common pool stored at Kings Bay, Georgia, USA. The warheads are serviced by US contractors, with crucial spare parts coming from the USA. The launch system on the SSBNs are US origin as well.
The entire control system of the RN's subs is now Microsoft Windows based. The UK moves to a new system when the US decides to do so. If it doesn't, it ceases to have a nuclear deterrent.

Meanwhile....Ex-chiefs: scrap UK nuclear missile program

Three retired senior military chiefs made an unlikely appeal Friday for Britain to scrap its 20 billion-pound ($30 billion) nuclear missile program, claiming it is unnecessary and no longer independent of the United States.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Jan 2009 13:23

Chinese nuclear deterrence policy spelt out.

China Defense White Paper Describes Nuclear Escalation

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 29 Jan 2009 03:58

Russia scraps plan to deploy nuclear-capable missiles in Kaliningrad

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 29 Jan 2009 10:58

New Fusion-Fission Reactor Design

Anybody know more about this? So it's like a regular fission reactor, but it also uses some of that energy to power a fusion device that generates neutrons to destroy the fission waste products? Is that feasible/viable?

Could this be of any use to a Thorium breeder process?
ie. instead of destroying waste, use the fusion neutrons to breed more U-233 from the Thorium. Would that work?

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 29 Jan 2009 11:51

linked article:

Fusion–Fission Transmutation Scheme—Efficient destruction of nuclear waste

A fusion-assisted transmutation system for the destruction of transuranic nuclear waste is developed by combining a subcritical fusion–fission hybrid assembly uniquely equipped to burn the worst thermal nonfissile transuranic isotopes with a new fuel cycle that uses cheaper light water reactors for most of the transmutation. The center piece of this fuel cycle, the high power density compact fusion neutron source (100 MW, outer radius <3 m), is made possible by a new divertor with a heat-handling capacity five times that of the standard alternative. The number of hybrids needed to destroy a given amount of waste is an order of magnitude below the corresponding number of critical fast-spectrum reactors (FRs) as the latter cannot fully exploit the new fuel cycle. Also, the time needed for 99% transuranic waste destruction reduces from centuries (with FR) to decades.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 30 Jan 2009 03:12

UN nuclear chief says Obama offers hope of 'saner' world

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 30 Jan 2009 03:23

General calls for Trident rethink

General Jack Sheehan said he thought the UK was "very close" to giving up nuclear weapons

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 30 Jan 2009 21:58

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/opinion/30fri1.html

January 30, 2009
Editorial
Rules of the Game

President George W. Bush, and his aides, could hardly wait to get rid of all those tiresome arms-control treaties when they took office. They tore up the 1972 antiballistic missile treaty to make way for a still largely pie-in-the-sky missile defense system. They opposed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and never made a serious effort to win a ban on the production of fissile material (the core of a nuclear weapon).

Mr. Bush grudgingly signed his one and only arms-reduction treaty with the Russians in 2002. That means that today — 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall — the United States and Russia still have more than 20,000 nuclear weapons, with thousands ready to launch within minutes.

The bad news, of course, didn’t stop there.

While Mr. Bush and his team were ridiculing treaties and arms control negotiations as “old think,” North Korea tested a nuclear device, Iran has been working overtime to produce nuclear fuel (usable for a reactor or a bomb) and many other countries are weighing whether they need to get into the nuclear game.

President Obama pledged to address these dangers when he was campaigning. In her recent confirmation hearing, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton argued that this country’s best hope of doing that is to restore treaties and a rules-based system. Now they have to translate that lofty intent into urgent action.

The first challenge is Russia, the only other country besides the United States with enough weapons to blow up the planet. The administration can start by negotiating a follow-on to the 1991 Start Treaty, which is set to expire in December. The pact contains the only rules for verifying any nuclear agreement, and it provides an opportunity for making even deeper cuts.

The two sides could easily go to 1,000 weapons each in this next round, down from the 1,700 to 2,200 deployed weapons agreed on in the 2002 Moscow treaty. Without any negotiations, the two can immediately take their weapons off hair-trigger alert.

We applaud the administration’s pledge to work for Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and to revive negotiations on a fissile material production ban. Neither will be easy to achieve, but both are essential if Mr. Obama is serious about reining in a frightening new world of ever-expanding nuclear appetites.

During the campaign, Mr. Obama opposed plans to build a new nuclear warhead. He was right. There is no military or scientific need. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is a strong advocate of the program. Mr. Obama should resist. If the United States is going to have any credibility in arguing that others must restrain their nuclear ambitions, it must restrain its own.

Mr. Bush repeatedly warned about the dangers of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. He was right. But he never put in place the strategy needed to ensure that that never happens. And he weakened some of this country’s most fundamental defenses, including its credibility.

President Obama must do better. He can start by restoring the rules of the game.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 31 Jan 2009 01:32

Los Alamos says lost equipment no security breach

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 31 Jan 2009 21:13

Ex-Microsoft Scientist Crafts Nuclear Reactor Startup

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 31 Jan 2009 23:31

Abdicating U.S. Nonproliferation Leadership

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 01 Feb 2009 22:40

Proliferation increases dangers from nuclear missiles

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Feb 2009 01:56

Uranium squeeze hands miners price to work with

BHP Billiton's go-slow on a multibillion-dollar expansion of its Olympic Dam copper/uranium/gold operation has created a bit of buzz in pure uranium production and exploration plays.

As analysts at EL & C Baillieu noted last week, it is the equivalent to the oil industry "losing" three Saudi Arabias. Baillieu said that when it is remembered that current (global) mine supply only sustains roughly 40 per cent of current demand, the question is, what is going to fill the gap?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Feb 2009 02:00

Take Nukes Off the Table

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Feb 2009 02:01

MOX gets ready to sail

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Feb 2009 02:01

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/01/27/ ... 233083440/

Former U.S. Air Force Secretary Thomas Reed says there's enough plutonium missing from the former Soviet Union to arm 25 Nagasaki-sized atomic bombs.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Feb 2009 06:08

Obama, Pentagon pull in different directions on no nukes goal

"To be blunt, there is absolutely no way we can maintain a credible deterrent and reduce the number of weapons in our stockpile without either resorting to testing our stockpile or pursuing a modernization program,"

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Feb 2009 20:48

Kailash wrote:Germans and Russians collaborating?!

Believe this doesn't belong here... but was too interesting to pass. US is already jittery.

((Kailash, delete it from the India thread.))

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 03 Feb 2009 21:59

NRao wrote:
Kailash wrote:Germans and Russians collaborating?!

Believe this doesn't belong here... but was too interesting to pass. US is already jittery.
((Kailash, delete it from the India thread.))

Sehr interessant! Russen und Deutschen zusammen, eh!

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Feb 2009 07:37

Britain seeks new talks on nuclear disarmament

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Feb 2009 09:34

UK might be running out of money.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 05 Feb 2009 12:17

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 Feb 2009 19:30

Pakistani Nuclear Scientist Set Free

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 07 Feb 2009 05:33

Kissinger calls on U.S., Russia to negotiate on new cuts in nuclear weapons

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 07 Feb 2009 05:34

Sweden to overturn nuclear ban

Nuclear power has been given a significant boost when Sweden said it planned to overturn a 29-year ban on atomic plants as part of a drive to increase energy security and combat global warming.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 07 Feb 2009 05:35

IBM makes supercomputer for nuclear explosion simulation

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Feb 2009 20:53

Russian official: Biden's words 'very positive'

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 09 Feb 2009 01:38

Russia says it is ready for more arms cuts

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Feb 2009 07:59

India proposes total ‘ban’ of N-weapon use

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Feb 2009 14:54

The Chinese stole "ALL" US nuclear weapon secrets.Pl read the whole reort on the link.

"The Chinese stole the design secrets to all -- repeat, all -- U.S. nuclear weapons, enabling them to leapfrog generations of technology development and put our nuclear arsenal, the country's last line of defense, at risk. To this day, we don't know quite when or how they did it, but we do know that Chinese intelligence operatives are still at work, systematically targeting not only America's defense secrets but our industries' valuable proprietary information.

"The answer was staring us in the face: We had no coherent game plan for identifying, assessing and stopping such threats. As the new head of U.S. counterintelligence, it would be my job to develop and execute the nation's first strategy for finding and neutralizing foreign spies. "

Foreign Spies Are Serious. Are We?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03498.html

PS:A signal lesson for India too,that our enemies have been spying and attacking ous relentlessly and we have yet to reorganise our intel and security apparatus to meet the current end future threats.