Fast Fission Podcast #14 – MP3 File
I awoke this morning to news reports that North Korea has once again resumed their production of plutonium for nuclear weapons. I suspect that’s no real surprise to anyone who pays attention to such things. After all, they threw IAEA inspectors out this spring and told the world of their plans.
All of the major news outlets carried the story, and virtually every one reported that the North Koreans obtained the plutonium by reprocessing spent fuel from their nuclear plant. The term “nuclear plant” in this instance refers to their small 5 MW test reactor, NOT a nuclear power plant designed to produce energy for industrial use or electricity generation.
Nuclear reactors come in many sizes and shapes; test and training reactors at universities, research reactors for government and industry, reactors used to produce medical isotopes, reactors inside nuclear power plants, and reactors designed to produce weapons materials. Each type is uniquely suited for its purpose, and usable weapons-grade plutonium is not produced by accident. It can only be obtained by reprocessing a unique kind of nuclear fuel from a reactor is operated a very specific way. In episode 77 of “This Week in Nuclear” I explained the details of why this is true, so go back and take a look if you’d like the details.
These are critically important differences. Imprecise reporting like this leads to misunderstanding on a broad scale. There is a huge misperception in the general population and among many otherwise well-informed policy makers that nuclear power plants can explode like atomic bombs, and that rogue nations could use their commercial nuclear power plants to kick start weapons programs. Both of these are wrong, and these misunderstandings are used to stoke anti-nuclear sentiments. In the end, failing to understand these differences can contribute to policy decisions and regulations that could deprive society of the benefits of nuclear energy.
Here’s what you need to remember: Used fuel from commercial nuclear power plants can not be used to make atomic bombs. No nation has ever created a nuclear weapon from spent fuel that came from a commercial nuclear power plant.
#1 by Jason Ribeiro - November 3rd, 2009 at 23:42
Somewhere I read this week the mention of India producing their atomic bomb from a nuclear power plant. This too was wrong. It was a reactor that was not producing electricity, though I don’t know the specifics of what type of research reactor it was.
Furthermore, this argument that there is a potential link between commercial nuclear power generation and the making of bombs cynically assumes the worst in humanity. If a country goes through the time, expense and effort with full transparency as the UAE has recently done, then why would they do that if bomb making was their intention? As a cover? Not at all, especially since that would be the wrong path to achieve a nefarious goal, nor would it be modifiable to do so later.
#2 by DocForesight - November 4th, 2009 at 18:01
And I fault leaders of both political parties, the news media and scientists who are guests on TV interview-type programs for not clarifying the essential differences between military and commercial programs.
Thanks, John, for shedding some light on this topic for those of us interested in energy topics in general, and nuclear in particular, but are not nuclear engineers or physicists.
#3 by Timray - November 8th, 2009 at 15:54
thanks John….your information gives me ammo for the cause….i am also planning on moving from San Diego to points East to get out of range. i am looking for a basement located in the desert to shield from the coming Electromagnetic pulse coming via Iran or North Korea. other than that i see a bright future for us all, hope we survive the illumination.