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

["Raymond Shadis" <shadis@ime.net>]

RE: Proliferation:

Am I mistaken or did India not scavenge enough  material from its power

reactor program to build and detonate a work-a-day bomb or two?

On the Homefront:

NCRP Draft Report No. SC 46-41, "Radiation Protection Issues Related to

Terrorist Activities" October 2000, spells out the potential damage from

IND's ( Improvised Nuclear Devices) of up to 10 kilotons/TNT yield.  What

else are these but dirty, inefficient weapons built by nuclear newcomers?

And why is it we do not believe such weapons could be based on contaminated

material?



Ray

----- Original Message -----

From: NECNP <necnp@necnp.org>

To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 11:49 AM

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





> 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.

>



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

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.