Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dave346
My point is the fissile Plutonium production will be limited by the core residence time. This will transmute portions of the Pu-239 into Pu-240 (and of course Pu-241 -> Pu-242) which is a neutron sink. A heavy water reactor or graphite reactor with a short core residence time would work. I don't think this plant will work to enable the Iranians to produce any weapons grade Plutonium - but lots of radioactive isotopes and ‘mixed’ Plutonium.
121 posted on 08/17/2010 3:10:33 PM PDT by 103198
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]


To: 103198

Sooooooo - hmmmm - sounds to me like this isn’t nearly as big of a deal as some are making it out to be? That it is not what Iran needs to make nuclear weapons. So, if this day comes and goes it is not the end. ? That is what I am reading on this thread from those in the know. At least that is what it sounds like.


122 posted on 08/17/2010 3:44:46 PM PDT by silentknight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]

To: 103198

You seem to know your stuff. Re my post above: do you suppose that the Bushehr WER could in fact be deliberately run as a Plutonium-239 farm by changing the fuel burn-up rate?

This would appear to be analogous to the effect of a short core-residence time - not enough neutron capture takes place to create the useless heavier Pu isotopes because the flux is deliberately kept suboptimal for energy generation (but optimal for enrichment)?


133 posted on 08/17/2010 5:27:12 PM PDT by agere_contra (...what if we won't eat the dog food?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson