Pravda (the Russian one, not the BBC) has an interesting article about the state of nuclear development in Asia.
Currently, the USA guarantees security of a number of countries in order to prevent them developing their own weapons :
“American security guarantees keep a number of countries from developing their own nuclear programs. However, times change. If Japan, for example, or South Korea realize that the USA’s guarantees are not that evident, they may start working on their own weapons. It can happen, especially if external threats put the strategic interests of these countries in danger.
“It is not ruled out that Japan may soon offer the USA a choice: either the States remains a reliable and responsible ally, or Tokyo guarantees its own security single-handedly.”
And, compared with conventional weapons, nuclear is a relatively cheap technology to develop :
Conventional weapons grow more and more expensive, whereas the development of nuclear arms becomes cheaper – approximately $300 million.
Indeed, if you just want something quick and dirty you wouldn’t even need that but, as this is the UK with our rediculous laws against possessing or publishing information suitable to terrorists, I wont elaborate.
The most important part of the article though is to illustrate the nature of the Nuclear non-proliferati0n treaty :
As a matter of fact, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty is a discriminatory one. Several countries decided that it was only them and on one else who could possess nuclear arms. However, they turned a blind eye on the fact that Israel became a nuclear nation too. Now the situation is developing according to the domino principle, and many countries will soon own nuclear arms, if they consider it necessary.
Hardly a way to promote cooperation and non-proliferation but not surprising really when the USA is calling the shots.
How much longer it will have influence though is anyone’s guess especially if their current fiscal incontinence knocks them off the top step as global policeman.
Finally, what article about nuclear weapons could be complete without a bomb photo – beautiful and awe-inspiring at the same time :
I see…..
“The big question in my mind is whether the plutonium can be kept out of the hands of those who would desire a bomb of their own.”
I would say no. Every weapon of war created has been used in war. Terrorists have been very resourceful in tha past at aquireing weapons and explosives and the nuke is the holy grail.
I don’t understand nuclear power all that well, but I thought the electricity generation was the by product of enriching plutonium, not the other way round. I thought you could build power plants that just generate electricity?
Plutonium is produced when Uranium 238 is bombarded with neutrons, generally in any nuclear reactor that has uranium as fuel. The design and operation of the reactor differ depending on whether it is being used for electricity generation or weapons grade Plutonium production (which itself is mostly pure Pu 239 or at least 90-95%).
The plutonium produced in a power plant reactor which runs for long periods between fuel changes exists in a mixture of isotopes (238, 239, 240, 241 and 242) and this mixture itself is dispersed amongst the uranium fuel metal. Whilst it can be separated out from the other elements, separating the different isotopes of plutonium is not too easy and the mixture of isotopes doesnt make good bomb material.
To produce much purer plutonium 239 you have to either run the reactor for very short periods like a few weeks before removing the uranium and separating out the plutonium or design a smaller reactor that can be refuelled whilst running. This mode of operation produces mostly pure Pu 239.
There are some other design differences as well such as moderator type and coolant type but, in summary, you either design a reactor to produce electrical power with low grade bomb material as a by-product or you design it to produce bomb material with heat as a by product.
The nuclear non-proliferation treaty is a bit of a big boys club, isn’t it.
Maybe it’s best that all countries that want nukes get them sooner rather than later. Then we can just try and move beyond them once the novelty has worn if. (If we survive).
Yes it is a rather strange club – we have something and because we have it you cant have it … or else.
If everyone had nukes then it removes the advantage (if you can call total destruction an advantage) of having them in the first place (which is what the whole purpose of the elite club is I think) but there are quite a few countries that I wouldnt trust when armed with a bag of shite let alone nukes.
The big problem with Nukes is that they are easy and cheap to make and the raw material (either enriched Uranium or Plutonium) comes from the nuclear power generation as a by-product (in Plutoniums case at least). With the current demand for new nuclear power, the amount of Plutonium available in the world will grow with it (Plutonium does not exist in nature).
The big question in my mind is whether the plutonium can be kept out of the hands of those who would desire a bomb of their own.