How to deal with Iran

[calm2chaos]

Once America realises that also other countries, have a right to nuclear energy...and whether we like it or not sooner or later they will get it; then the threat of nuclear attack recedes. There has only ever been one country on record to use such terrible weapons on human populations areas, now I seem to forget..who was that now?...

I don't think there is a country that has a problem with Iran having nuclear energy. The problem runs into the fact thay are using dual purpose processors. The secondary purpose other then nuclear power is enrichening uranuim to weapons grade. There in lies the problem. Nuclear power and nuclear weapons are completely seperate things....

That was the US in case you forgot. And it was a smart tactical, military and human decision. That in the long run was done to save lives as opposed to the inevitable attack on mainline japann which would have in many peoples opinion cost even more lives

[lynx]

The problem runs into the fact thay are using dual purpose processors. The secondary purpose other then nuclear power is enrichening uranuim to weapons grade. There in lies the problem.

Indeed, that (and the half truths about it) is exactly where the problem lies.

You can't run a successful commercial nuclear power plant without using enriched uranium. There's a whole world of difference between the level of enrichment required to sustain a power plant and that required for nuclear weapons, and so far Iran hasn't even reached the level required to run a power plant.

Of course, if they don't make their own power plant grade enriched uranium then someone will have to make it for them, and whoever that is has got them by the balls. Hardly surprising they want they're own facilities.

[calm2chaos]

The problem runs into the fact thay are using dual purpose processors. The secondary purpose other then nuclear power is enrichening uranuim to weapons grade. There in lies the problem.

Indeed, that (and the half truths about it) is exactly where the problem lies.

You can't run a successful commercial nuclear power plant without using enriched uranium. There's a whole world of difference between the level of enrichment required to sustain a power plant and that required for nuclear weapons, and so far Iran hasn't even reached the level required to run a power plant.

Of course, if they don't make their own power plant grade enriched uranium then someone will have to make it for them, and whoever that is has got them by the balls. Hardly surprising they want they're own facilities.

But once that technology is ready, and there is a lot of speculation on how close they are. I ve heard 6 months and I have heard a couple of years. But once it is in hand this processor does not only give them nuclear power capabilities. It gives them weapons capabilities. I have no problem with a single use processor. But the ONLY use of a dual processor is for generating weapons grade material

[lynx]

Last I heard, Iran had produced enriched uranium to a level of 3% (the ratio of U235 to U238. That in itself is sufficient to power a heavy water reactor (requires about 2% U235), but the complications in design and operation of such a plant are probably sufficient to rule that out. A more reasonable target would be about 4%, which would allow them to run a light water plant.

What is never made clear is that the difficulty in increasing the enrichment is exponential. If it is twice as hard to reach 6% than 3%, then it 4 times harder to reach 9% and 8 times harder to reach 12%. For weapon-usable material you need at least 20%, and for a true nuclear bomb you need to reach about 85%. The technology being used in Iran is incapable of producing weapons-usable material, let alone a weapons-grade product.

The other piece of disinformation which seems to be brought up is that Iran "has plans for a dual-use reactor". Note the wording, it is very important. It doesn't say that Iran "plans a dual-use reactor", merely that it has plans (designs, technical drawings etc) for such a plant. Since that sort of information is fairly freely available it would be extremely surprising if they didn't have them.

In any case, any commercial nuclear plant can be easily converted to so called "dual-use". All that is necessary is to replace some of the fuel rods with rods you want converting. Obviously it's a little more complex than that, but not much. Some commercial plants in the USA (for example Watts Bar in Tennessee) have already been converted.

BTW, Iran supposedly has most of the key components required to build a nuclear plant already. It obtained them, legally, in 2005 from a subsidiary of a well-known US company - Halliburton.

[nabeelisnabeel]

Iran is ono of the God-gifted countries. Full of God's blessings. Its social values are very very higher than any others'.

(I m not Iranian.)

[calm2chaos]

Iran is ono of the God-gifted countries. Full of God's blessings. Its social values are very very higher than any others'.

(I m not Iranian.)

Does that include terrorism?

[calm2chaos]

Last I heard, Iran had produced enriched uranium to a level of 3% (the ratio of U235 to U238. That in itself is sufficient to power a heavy water reactor (requires about 2% U235), but the complications in design and operation of such a plant are probably sufficient to rule that out. A more reasonable target would be about 4%, which would allow them to run a light water plant.

What is never made clear is that the difficulty in increasing the enrichment is exponential. If it is twice as hard to reach 6% than 3%, then it 4 times harder to reach 9% and 8 times harder to reach 12%. For weapon-usable material you need at least 20%, and for a true nuclear bomb you need to reach about 85%. The technology being used in Iran is incapable of producing weapons-usable material, let alone a weapons-grade product.

The other piece of disinformation which seems to be brought up is that Iran "has plans for a dual-use reactor". Note the wording, it is very important. It doesn't say that Iran "plans a dual-use reactor", merely that it has plans (designs, technical drawings etc) for such a plant. Since that sort of information is fairly freely available it would be extremely surprising if they didn't have them.

In any case, any commercial nuclear plant can be easily converted to so called "dual-use". All that is necessary is to replace some of the fuel rods with rods you want converting. Obviously it's a little more complex than that, but not much. Some commercial plants in the USA (for example Watts Bar in Tennessee) have already been converted.

BTW, Iran supposedly has most of the key components required to build a nuclear plant already. It obtained them, legally, in 2005 from a subsidiary of a well-known US company - Halliburton.

What I have read is that Iran is still shopping for the dual use technology. It's not that they just have the plans. They are actively looking to aquire this technology. It's definetly not something we need to close our eyes to. I can't think of anything good that can come out of Iran being a nuclear power.

[manker]

Last I heard, Iran had produced enriched uranium to a level of 3% (the ratio of U235 to U238. That in itself is sufficient to power a heavy water reactor (requires about 2% U235), but the complications in design and operation of such a plant are probably sufficient to rule that out. A more reasonable target would be about 4%, which would allow them to run a light water plant.

What is never made clear is that the difficulty in increasing the enrichment is exponential. If it is twice as hard to reach 6% than 3%, then it 4 times harder to reach 9% and 8 times harder to reach 12%. For weapon-usable material you need at least 20%, and for a true nuclear bomb you need to reach about 85%. The technology being used in Iran is incapable of producing weapons-usable material, let alone a weapons-grade product.

The other piece of disinformation which seems to be brought up is that Iran "has plans for a dual-use reactor". Note the wording, it is very important. It doesn't say that Iran "plans a dual-use reactor", merely that it has plans (designs, technical drawings etc) for such a plant. Since that sort of information is fairly freely available it would be extremely surprising if they didn't have them.

In any case, any commercial nuclear plant can be easily converted to so called "dual-use". All that is necessary is to replace some of the fuel rods with rods you want converting. Obviously it's a little more complex than that, but not much. Some commercial plants in the USA (for example Watts Bar in Tennessee) have already been converted.

BTW, Iran supposedly has most of the key components required to build a nuclear plant already. It obtained them, legally, in 2005 from a subsidiary of a well-known US company - Halliburton.

What I have read is that Iran is still shopping for the dual use technology. It's not that they just have the plans. They are actively looking to aquire this technology. It's definetly not something we need to close our eyes to. I can't think of anything good that can come out of Iran being a nuclear power.

It's not all about them having nukes - Altho' if they did have nukes then, from their point of view, it would certainly be a good thing as it would deter anyone from invading them.

How about the Iranian people having access to a clean, renewable and cheap energy source. That would be a good thing to come out of them having nuclear technology.

You can't ride roughshod all over soverign nations and tell them what they can and cannot do with regard to its citizens well being - no matter how much you'd like to.

[lynx]

Last I heard, Iran had produced enriched uranium to a level of 3% (the ratio of U235 to U238. That in itself is sufficient to power a heavy water reactor (requires about 2% U235), but the complications in design and operation of such a plant are probably sufficient to rule that out. A more reasonable target would be about 4%, which would allow them to run a light water plant.

What is never made clear is that the difficulty in increasing the enrichment is exponential. If it is twice as hard to reach 6% than 3%, then it 4 times harder to reach 9% and 8 times harder to reach 12%. For weapon-usable material you need at least 20%, and for a true nuclear bomb you need to reach about 85%. The technology being used in Iran is incapable of producing weapons-usable material, let alone a weapons-grade product.

The other piece of disinformation which seems to be brought up is that Iran "has plans for a dual-use reactor". Note the wording, it is very important. It doesn't say that Iran "plans a dual-use reactor", merely that it has plans (designs, technical drawings etc) for such a plant. Since that sort of information is fairly freely available it would be extremely surprising if they didn't have them.

In any case, any commercial nuclear plant can be easily converted to so called "dual-use". All that is necessary is to replace some of the fuel rods with rods you want converting. Obviously it's a little more complex than that, but not much. Some commercial plants in the USA (for example Watts Bar in Tennessee) have already been converted.

BTW, Iran supposedly has most of the key components required to build a nuclear plant already. It obtained them, legally, in 2005 from a subsidiary of a well-known US company - Halliburton.

What I have read is that Iran is still shopping for the dual use technology. It's not that they just have the plans. They are actively looking to aquire this technology. It's definetly not something we need to close our eyes to. I can't think of anything good that can come out of Iran being a nuclear power.

My feeling is that you haven't quite got it.

The old heavy water reactors (and I mean old) would fail if you replaced a significant number of rods, so the only way to produce significant quantities of fissionable material was to pack it round the core. Edit: out of date hacks think that's still the way it is done, and since commercial plants don't have space they assume that's why places like Iran want to build their own reactors.

Modern commercial reactors (which is exactly what would be supplied to Iran by an external company) do not have the same limitations, so production of fissionable material can be achieved simply by replacing fuel rods, albeit with a small drop in reactor efficiency.

Let's assume they go down the route "supposedly" preferred by the US government, and buy nuclear power capability from outside. Everyone should be happy. The following week, they could kick out the suppliers and upgrade the plant to dual use (takes a few weeks at most). What stops that?

The answer probably lies with the operating software, my guess is that it stops working. And if it stops working in one situation, what's to say it won't stop working in other situations - do things our way or your power goes off. I think I said it earlier, the supplier has you by the balls.

Dual use is not the issue, that's a smokescreen thrown up to hide the real sticking point. The real issue is about control. Quite frankly, recent behaviour has shown that it is questionable whether the US is worthy, or even capable, of being the one to wield that sort of control in international situations, particularly under the current administration.

Edit 2: just something to make you think - AFAIK India and Pakistan only have commercially supplied reactors, so where did their fissionable material come from?

[calm2chaos]

What I have read is that Iran is still shopping for the dual use technology. It's not that they just have the plans. They are actively looking to aquire this technology. It's definetly not something we need to close our eyes to. I can't think of anything good that can come out of Iran being a nuclear power.

It's not all about them having nukes - Altho' if they did have nukes then, from their point of view, it would certainly be a good thing as it would deter anyone from invading them.

How about the Iranian people having access to a clean, renewable and cheap energy source. That would be a good thing to come out of them having nuclear technology.

You can't ride roughshod all over soverign nations and tell them what they can and cannot do with regard to its citizens well being - no matter how much you'd like to.

Having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely seperate issues. If you actually trust Iran enough to thinkthey want it for deterent reasons then I think your dreaming. I don't want to find out of the world is wrong, the cost is just to high.