It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
urrm, didnt saddam allow access to ALL factories?
where as IRAN didnt?
doesnt sound like there helping, compared to the PREVIOUS IAEA incidents.
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
And the plants that IRAN is working with, have been concluded by officials as NO WHERE NEAR large enough for civilian energy processes, yet they are the perfect size to produce NUCLEAR MATERIALS.
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
When youve got a man, whom considers himself on a mission from God, and who believes when he DIES, he'll be sent to his god with his virgins ( the greatest moment of his religous life ) then what does he care?
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
why not remove israel from the planet.. as he's already said is his dream...
ESPECIALLY now the world are starting to stamp there feet at him.
He knows one way or another, he's gunna get attacked by either Israel, or the western world.
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
why not destroy your mortal enemy before they have the chance.
Originally posted by longbow
I am surprised there are still people who think Iran's nuclear programm is for energy production. If this was the case there would be no problem to build so called "caramel reactors" which are able to produce energy, but are unsuited for nuclear weapons production. However the Iranian reactors are dual use reactors - the can be used for both energy and nukes. That clearly shows Iran has no intention to use them just to make electricity, they want to have nukes, period.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
Not only can Iran build
light water reactors instead of heavy water ones, but they rejected on offer from Russia to have their Uranium enriched in Russian instead of Iran. For a country that claims it’s nuclear program is peaceful they sure do seem to be rejecting every offer that would legitimize that claim. I don't know how anyone can still believe in what they say, their actions and reactions prove only one thing, and its not what Iran is preaching.
You must have missed my post above.
Iran is not building a heavy water reactor.
Iran Constructing the 40 MW Heavy Water Reactor at Arak Despite Calls Not to Do So by the European Union and the IAEA Board of Governors
New satelllite imagery obtained by ISIS from Space Imaging and DigitalGlobe supports the Iranian statement and other statements of unnamed sources that, "Iran has laid the foundations for the research reactor at Arak," as reported by Reuters on March 3, 2005.
The construction complicates negotiations currently underway between the European Union and Iran. The Europeans are asking that Iran abandon all uranium enrichment activities, reprocessing-related activities, and the heavy water reactor project. The Europeans have offered to replace the heavy water reactor with a light water research reactor that would be more proliferation resistant. The spent fuel from this imported reactor could be sent out of Iran, a step that Iran has agreed to do with the fuel from the Russian-supplied Bushehr power reactors.
Adjacent to the reactor construction site is the heavy water production plant, which is anticipated to supply the necessary heavy water for the heavy water reactor. The Secretary of the Iranian Supreme National Security Council, Dr. Hasan Rowhani, said on February 7, 2005 on Iranian television, "We may be able to produce heavy water soon, within the next few weeks."
February 29, 2004
February 17, 2005
February 27, 2005
Arak HWR
New satelllite imagery obtained by ISIS from Space Imaging and DigitalGlobe supports the Iranian statement and other statements of unnamed sources that, "Iran has laid the foundations for the research reactor at Arak," as reported by Reuters on March 3, 2005.
The 40MW heavy water research reactor is significant because it produces high quality plutonium, the most important component for a compact, nuclear device. If Iran wishes to develop a nuclear weapon small enough to launch on top of its Shahab 3 or 4 missiles, it will most probably be an implosion device with a plutonium (Pu) core.
The only way to acquire that is through reprocessing irradiated fuel. Bushehr is a light water reactor that has received much international attention and most probably will continue to be closely scrutinised, making it difficult to clandestinely remove its spent fuel for reprocessing. Even if the reactor has just as much attention, the Iranians would have a better chance of removing irradiated fuel or irradiating natural uranium targets for Pu production in this reactor.
Indeed, a heavy water reactor is among the most dangerous in existence from a proliferation perspective. One reason is that the low neutron cross section of heavy water facilitates a high number of U238 (uranium-238 isotope) atoms to absorb neutrons, resulting in the production of a greater quantity and better quality of plutonium product.
According to David Albright, Director of the Institute for Science and International Security, the IR-40 will be able to produce 8-10kg of plutonium per year – approximately one to two bombs’ worth of nuclear material. The IAEA holds that 8kg of plutonium constitutes a “significant quantity” – enough to build a nuclear weapon.
Arak HWR
Originally posted by ArchAngel
Heavy water reactors are cheaper, and safer to run than the light water reactors like they have almost finished at Bushehr.
In nuclear jargon, light water refers to plain, ordinary water. Water is used in a reactor as a moderator to slow the speed of nuetrons fired at U-235. By slowing the nuetrons, the chance of a nuetron attaching to a U-235 atom (causing fission) is increased. The advantage of using light water in a reactor is that it is both cheap and plentiful. To produce weapons-grade material from a light water plant requires an enrichment facility.
Some reactors are built to use heavy water (water whose atoms contain an extra nuetron) as a moderator. Heavy water is expensive to produce, but allows the creation of plutonium without a costly and high-tech enrichment facility. The IAEA monitors transactions involving heavy water because of the proliferation risk.
Nuclear Reactors
Originally posted by WestPoint23
So, a heavy water reactor is only cheap if a plutonium enrichment facility is built, which begs the question, why does Iran need a plutonium enrichment facility? If they don't build the facility a HWR is cheaper then a light water reactor.
[edit on 24-1-2006 by WestPoint23]
Heavy water is expensive to produce, but allows the creation of plutonium without a costly and high-tech enrichment facility.
The reasons light water reactors are so common today is because the military forces of America, and the Soviets needed compact long life reactors for their navies.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
A HWR allows the creation of a Weapons Grade plutonium without a “costly and high-tech enrichment facility.” Now isn't that convenient?. You build a more expensive heavy water design so you can produce weapons grade plutonium easier. I know a light water reactor requires an enrichment facility, but a HWR is more expensive to build and design, based on that the cost between the two is not that great.
Nuclear Power Reactors: A Study in Technological Lock–in
.....
Not only is the LWR used almost
exclusively in the USA today, but this type, based largely on technology developed in the USA, is being used
for about 80 percent of all the reactors built or under construction in the world today.”1 While an appropriate
decision at the time, it now seems that light water may have been an unfortunate choice. One of the interesting
features of this history is the belief held by many that light water is not the best technology, either
economically or technically. The evidence in support of this belief, while not incontrovertible, is strong
enough to support the contention that light water is not the superior technology. This suggests that other
technologies should still be present in the market.
.......
The average annual load factors of light water and gas graphite
reactors have been approximately equal at 63 percent. Heavy water reactors, however, have had an average
annual load factor of 73 percent.
......
Hugh McIntyre estimated that the heavy water Candu reactors at Pickering generate power at about 75
percent of the cost of the light water reactors of equivalent size at the Zion 2 generating station in Illinois.15
This is consistent with analyses done by Ontario Hydro, which suggest that if Ontario Hydro had a mature light
water reactor program, the costs of nuclear electricity would be 20 to 25 percent higher than with the current
heavy water systems.
Is that why the US has 40+ Light Water reactors all over the country?
Heavy water reactors are safer, cheaper, and can use natural [Non-Enriched] Uranium.
The Foundation for Democracy citing sources in the U.S and Iran offered no further information.