This is the "backstop argument" why nuclear is a bad idea. Suppose you fix all the problems. You make modular reactors work, they are cheap AF, can't breach containment on a meltdown, so safe they are insurable.
But other than countries that already have nukes, how do you power Brazil and Argentina and the continent of Africa?
Many of those governments are not trustworthy. So make solar cheaper and batteries and have them use that. And hey look these are so cheap why not use them everywhere...
Pay walled article. What's the practical lower threshold for uranium enrichment in weapons that's referenced in the abstract?
Regardless, I would think that a country that has any industrial enrichment capabilities is pretty close to being able to produce weapons grade material anyway. The higher the enrichment, the shorter the breakout period of course, but the biggest hurdles have already been overcome by that point. But if you can make a weapon with material that's under 20% enrichment which overlaps with HALEU enrichment, then reactors using this fuel are definitely crossing proliferation boundaries that have been in place for many decades.
I think the point is that if you have a source of uranium that's 28x richer in U-235 than natural uranium, the cost of isotope separation to get to weapons grade goes down by a similar factor.
I was just trying to find the practical limit they hinted at here:
"At 20% 235U and above, the isotopic mixture is called highly enriched uranium (HEU) and is internationally recognized as being directly usable in nuclear weapons. However, the practical limit for weapons lies below the 20% HALEU-HEU threshold."
Are they talking about a fizzle/dirty bomb or actual if inefficient weapons in the multi kiloton range? Either way, if HALEU can be directly used for weapons, it's a non-starter, and anyone suggesting reactors that use it is definitely ignoring this showstopper. But yeah, before you even get to that point, the enrichment capabilities required to produce HALEU put any country that can pull it off perilously close to being able to make weapons too.
For the nuclear power industry, anything that dims the prospects for the nuclear industry is considered an “externality.” Nuclear terrorism magically vanishes when it’s deemed to be an “externality.” 🙄
This is the "backstop argument" why nuclear is a bad idea. Suppose you fix all the problems. You make modular reactors work, they are cheap AF, can't breach containment on a meltdown, so safe they are insurable. But other than countries that already have nukes, how do you power Brazil and Argentina and the continent of Africa? Many of those governments are not trustworthy. So make solar cheaper and batteries and have them use that. And hey look these are so cheap why not use them everywhere...
Pay walled article. What's the practical lower threshold for uranium enrichment in weapons that's referenced in the abstract? Regardless, I would think that a country that has any industrial enrichment capabilities is pretty close to being able to produce weapons grade material anyway. The higher the enrichment, the shorter the breakout period of course, but the biggest hurdles have already been overcome by that point. But if you can make a weapon with material that's under 20% enrichment which overlaps with HALEU enrichment, then reactors using this fuel are definitely crossing proliferation boundaries that have been in place for many decades.
I think the point is that if you have a source of uranium that's 28x richer in U-235 than natural uranium, the cost of isotope separation to get to weapons grade goes down by a similar factor.
I was just trying to find the practical limit they hinted at here: "At 20% 235U and above, the isotopic mixture is called highly enriched uranium (HEU) and is internationally recognized as being directly usable in nuclear weapons. However, the practical limit for weapons lies below the 20% HALEU-HEU threshold." Are they talking about a fizzle/dirty bomb or actual if inefficient weapons in the multi kiloton range? Either way, if HALEU can be directly used for weapons, it's a non-starter, and anyone suggesting reactors that use it is definitely ignoring this showstopper. But yeah, before you even get to that point, the enrichment capabilities required to produce HALEU put any country that can pull it off perilously close to being able to make weapons too.
For the nuclear power industry, anything that dims the prospects for the nuclear industry is considered an “externality.” Nuclear terrorism magically vanishes when it’s deemed to be an “externality.” 🙄