RE: So, is reprocessing in America's future?

[NECNP <necnp@necnp.org>]

Actually, weapons grade plutonium is needed only to create "clean" 

weapons.  One can still get a critical mass from reactor grade plutonium, 

or barring that one could just use it to contaminate an area.  It would be 

a simple matter for a terrorist to contaminate something like the elevators 

in the World Trade Center and have the non-weapons grade plutonium tracked 

all through the buildings shutting them down for a long time.  It really 

doesn't need to be a bomb.



Dave Pyles

former laboratory supervisor for

Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. West Valley, NY



At 07:34 AM 07/03/2001 -0500, you wrote:

[Bauman, Rodney]   I've heard this over and over again and understand the

physics behind the Pu-239/Pu-240 weapons-grade vs. reactor-grade plutonium

argument.  But if in fact, commercial reactor spent fuel plutonium is not

suitable for weapons production, then why all the hoopla?  Why did Jimmy

Carter renounce (by Executive Order) the reprocessing of spent commercial

reactor fuel?  I've always been told that it was due to nuclear

proliferation concerns - due to the production of plutonium.  But, everybody

who knows plutonium says that reactor-grade plutonium is useless for

weapons.



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.