- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,265
- 126
It's enriched to 27%, nuclear weapons need 90%.
I know what's required. BTW 90% is optimal, not "needed". Yes I still know the numerical difference, which is irrelevant.
It's enriched to 27%, nuclear weapons need 90%.
What argument are you trying to make here? If you're arguing that our government is out of control and not to be trusted, you're preaching to the choir. Shall I point out the same the next time you post in a thread telling me to rely on government to wipe my ass for me? Sheesh.What cost is that?
Or is it the other way around- where we pretend that the boogeyman is out to get us, a la Iraqi WMD's? Niger Uranium? "Pretty well confirmed" reports of AlQ meeting with Iraqi officials in Prague?
Anybody who puts much faith in what intelligence agencies & our govt tell us about such things when they're beating the drums of war is a chump, forgetting that they manipulate public opinion to serve an agenda. Not to mention that any American who trusts the Israelis any more than they trust the Iranians has been hopelessly propagandized.
I mean, wtf? Do I need to quote Goering again?
Didn't they recently state they were going to make higher doped fuel for medical devices?
This would be in line with that.
It's enriched to 27%, nuclear weapons need 90%.
So while this interests those clamoring for war, it verifies nothing with regards to weapons development.
Indeed. Practical nuclear weapons use 80%+HEU, with 93.5% apparently being the point of diminished returns. Plutonium cores of the right isotopic mixtures are preferable, with ~1/4 the mass of uranium cores.
Source? I've found this 2007 paper suggesting LEU can be used in place of HEU for such purposes, but nothing to suggest the use of HEU has actually been phased out.Modern medicine uses isotopes produced by different means.
Source? I've found this 2007 paper suggesting LEU can be used in place of HEU for such purposes, but nothing to suggest the use of HEU has actually been phased out.
On a side note, what if for example Iran decided to reconvert the reactor we helped them build in the '60s back to running off HEU, and enrich their own HEU for if? I get the impression that you'd prefer Iran be bombed to pieces rather than allow anything of the sort, eh?
People who deny the peaceful applications of uranium enriched far beyond 27% and downplay the fact that 27% is far below what has ever been proven to make an effective weapon come off as warmongers who would prefer to bomb Iran to me.
People who deny the peaceful applications of uranium enriched far beyond 27% and downplay the fact that 27% is far below what has ever been proven to make an effective weapon come off as warmongers who would prefer to bomb Iran to me.
You're not actually responding to what you quoted from me there, and you're completely ignoring questions I asked you in my post prior to what you quoted too.Considering that Iran says it wants nuclear power and that requires 5%, so that's not it. Enlighten us with specific vital applications where HEU is indispensable.
Hayabusa seems to trying to with his "Modern medicine uses isotopes produced by different means" in response to Acanthus's mention of medical isotopes produced with HEU. Granted, it's a rather lame try given the fact that Hayabusa has yet to produce any source to support his claim.Once again, I don't think that anyone in this thread has ever denied that there are peaceful applications beyond 20%.
You're not actually responding to what you quoted from me there, and you're completely ignoring questions I asked you in my post prior to what you quoted too.
A cursory search will show that other isotopes are used for just about everything. I mentioned that to Acanthus, but I did't feel obligated to seek out specifics any more than following up with papers designed to demonstrate that water is wet. I still don't. Others may and I'm confident that you will need a towel when a bucket of room temperature H2O is poured on you.Hayabusa seems to trying to with his "Modern medicine uses isotopes produced by different means" in response to Acanthus's mention of medical isotopes produced with HEU. Granted, it's a rather lame try given the fact that Hayabusa has yet to produce any source to support his claim.
Other types of reactors use far higher than 5% enrichment, and it's not like they're theoretical constructs either, they exist and work too. So again I ask: what if for example Iran decided to reconvert the reactor we helped them build in the '60s back to running off HEU, and enrich their own HEU for if? I get the impression that you'd prefer Iran be bombed to pieces rather than allow anything of the sort, eh? And the same probably goes for enriching to the 19.75% which the reactor currently uses, eh?Light water reactors, which are the most common, use 5% enrichment. It's not like they are theoretical constructs. They exist and they work.
My search has turned up statements to the contrary, such as this one the NNSA posted just a few months ago:A cursory search will show that other isotopes are used for just about everything.
Molybdenum-99 (Mo-99) is used to produce technetium-99m (Tc-99m), a medical isotope that is used in about 100,000 diagnostic medical procedures globally every day. Today, Mo-99 is produced at aging facilities in Europe, Canada and South Africa primarily using highly-enriched uranium (HEU) – a weapons-usable material.
Other types of reactors use far higher than 5% enrichment, and it's not like they're theoretical constructs either, they exist and work too. So again I ask: what if for example Iran decided to reconvert the reactor we helped them build in the '60s back to running off HEU, and enrich their own HEU for if? I get the impression that you'd prefer Iran be bombed to pieces rather than allow anything of the sort, eh? And the same probably goes for enriching to the 19.75% which the reactor currently uses, eh?
My search has turned up statements to the contrary, such as this one the NNSA posted just a few months ago:
Nobody necessarily needs uranium of any sort, as millions of years of human existence proved. However, that does nothing to change the fact that Iran is legally entitled to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, HEU and otherwise.Regarding your first point- Iran doesn't need HEU.
I read the whole page, but nothing there changes the fact that what I quoted from the page conflicts with your claim that "Modern medicine uses isotopes produced by different means."As for the second part lets look at the rest of what the nnsa has to sayoops looks like HEU won't be needed
I'd prefer you stop your tapdancing and answer the questions I asked you. Again: what if for example Iran decided to reconvert the reactor we helped them build in the '60s back to running off HEU, and enrich their own HEU for if? I get the impression that you'd prefer Iran be bombed to pieces rather than allow anything of the sort, eh? And the same probably goes for enriching to the 19.75% which the reactor currently uses, eh?Time to tapdance.
Nobody necessarily needs uranium of any sort, as millions of years of human existence proved. However, that does nothing to change the fact that Iran is legally entitled to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, HEU and otherwise.
I read the whole page, but nothing there changes the fact that what I quoted from the page conflicts with your claim that "Modern medicine uses isotopes produced by different means."
I'd prefer you stop your tapdancing and answer the questions I asked you. Again: what if for example Iran decided to reconvert the reactor we helped them build in the '60s back to running off HEU, and enrich their own HEU for if? I get the impression that you'd prefer Iran be bombed to pieces rather than allow anything of the sort, eh? And the same probably goes for enriching to the 19.75% which the reactor currently uses, eh?
Strawman much?
I prefer metaphor. But then again you're a 9/11 truther, makes sense you'd call out the inherent falsities in any metaphor as a straw man fallacy. Conspiracy theorist rationalization techniques 101.
I'm no truther, and what you offered is a strawman nonetheless.
No, I'm only declaring that countries should be allowed to do what they are legally entitled to do, Iran included.You come along and declare that Iran should have what it wants
Did you imagine I claimed otherwise?Also, HEU isn't a medical isotope
A metaphor a form of analogy where one asserts that one thing is another, Shakespeare's "all the world's a stage" being one classic example. On the other hand, a strawman is when one misrepresents another's position rather than actually addressing it, such as your "Iran is perfectly innocent" nonsense. I don't presume to be in a potion to know if Iran is innocent, perfectly or otherwise, but I do know that no publicly available evidence proves them guilty of working to develop nuclear weapons.Technically, so is any metaphor. A strawman argument is an "informal" fallacy.
No, I'm only declaring that countries should be allowed to do what they are legally entitled to do, Iran included.