3 ms·

Quick summary for anyone in a hurry. Thorium-232 fertile material absorbs a neutron in a reactor and quickly transfers through Protactinium-233 to Uranium-233,

Quick summary for anyone in a hurry. Thorium-232 fertile material absorbs a neutron in a reactor and quickly transfers through Protactinium-233 to Uranium-233, a fissile fuel. Pa-233 is a strong neutron absorber so reactor designers like to pull it out of the reactor chemically to let it decay to U-233. Problem is, if you pull it out and let it decay and you're a bad guy, you can get fairly pure weapons-grade U-233, which is like U-235 and Plutonium-239. Countermeasures are to make sure there's some U-238 around to blend it down (but then it makes Plutonium and minor actinides), use faster neutrons (not as affected by the Pa), or install safeguards around the reactor. I'm a huge proponent of nuclear reactors but I have yet to see a design that is truly proliferation-proof. All reactors require safeguards. It's still well worth getting that low-footprint 24/7 clean energy, which nukes alone can produce. Thorium is great. It doesn't automatically solve all issues in nuclear. Here are the highlights of modern common Thorium Misconceptions: https://whatisnuclear.com/thorium-myths.html https://whatisnuclear.com/thorium-myths.html

canhascodez 8y ago
> I'm a huge proponent of nuclear reactors but I have yet to see a design that is truly proliferation-proof. I assume this statement is limited to nuclear power generation? You wouldn't extend that to, say, that one Iraqi research reactor?
- acidburnNSA 8y ago
  Yeah I'm mostly referring to engaging them in their unique ability to make 24/7 clean and low-footprint energy. I don't support using them for making nuclear weapons.
mdorazio 8y ago
Thanks for this summary. Personally, I think at some point we're going to have to accept that non-proliferation is kind of a lost cause. We're rapidly approaching a time when anyone with some spare time and internet access can start CRISPRing a new plague or fly a drone spewing sarin above a crowd of people. Going to great lengths to cripple power production to prevent the production of some fissile material is like plugging a leak in your boat when there are multiple torpedoes about to hit. If you can go from some U-233 to a working weapon capable of threatening other nations, there are probably other avenues available to you as well.
- acidburnNSA 8y ago
  Fully agreed. And it's usually much easier to just get some high-speed centrifuges and enrich uranium and make a very simple gun-type nuclear bomb. This requires no nuclear reactor whatsoever and will not go away if we ban nuclear reactors.
  - angry_octet 8y ago
    Well, it takes lots of electricity and a cascade of hundreds of ultra high speed (2kHz) centrifuges full of ultra corrosive, poisonous uranium hexafluoride. 'Just getting' some of these is the story of modern proliferation, the theft of the tech specs from Europe by AQ Khan, and his/Pakistan's subsequent proliferation to Iran, Libra and North Korea. Because without good centrifuges, the SWU (separation work) per electrical energy is very poor -- more than 100 times more energy.
    - acidburnNSA 8y ago
      That's why Silex technology (laser isotopic enrichment) is the only privately held information that is classified by the US government [1]. It can bring energy needs down by a lot, with a much smaller footprint. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_isotopes_by_laser_excitation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_isotopes_by_lase...
- angry_octet 8y ago
  Nuclear, chem & bio weapons are all significantly complicated, to manufacture and deploy. All have likely blowback on the groups building and using them, and there are counter-measures against all too. For counter-proliferation we can walk and chew gum at the same time. If that's too difficult for you, please go back to optimizing click-through.

canhascodez 8y ago

> I'm a huge proponent of nuclear reactors but I have yet to see a design that is truly proliferation-proof. I assume this statement is limited to nuclear power generation? You wouldn't extend that to, say, that one Iraqi research reactor?

acidburnNSA 8y ago
Yeah I'm mostly referring to engaging them in their unique ability to make 24/7 clean and low-footprint energy. I don't support using them for making nuclear weapons.

mdorazio 8y ago

Thanks for this summary. Personally, I think at some point we're going to have to accept that non-proliferation is kind of a lost cause. We're rapidly approaching a time when anyone with some spare time and internet access can start CRISPRing a new plague or fly a drone spewing sarin above a crowd of people. Going to great lengths to cripple power production to prevent the production of some fissile material is like plugging a leak in your boat when there are multiple torpedoes about to hit. If you can go from some U-233 to a working weapon capable of threatening other nations, there are probably other avenues available to you as well.

acidburnNSA 8y ago
Fully agreed. And it's usually much easier to just get some high-speed centrifuges and enrich uranium and make a very simple gun-type nuclear bomb. This requires no nuclear reactor whatsoever and will not go away if we ban nuclear reactors.
- angry_octet 8y ago
  Well, it takes lots of electricity and a cascade of hundreds of ultra high speed (2kHz) centrifuges full of ultra corrosive, poisonous uranium hexafluoride. 'Just getting' some of these is the story of modern proliferation, the theft of the tech specs from Europe by AQ Khan, and his/Pakistan's subsequent proliferation to Iran, Libra and North Korea. Because without good centrifuges, the SWU (separation work) per electrical energy is very poor -- more than 100 times more energy.
  - acidburnNSA 8y ago
    That's why Silex technology (laser isotopic enrichment) is the only privately held information that is classified by the US government [1]. It can bring energy needs down by a lot, with a much smaller footprint. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_isotopes_by_laser_excitation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_isotopes_by_lase...
angry_octet 8y ago
Nuclear, chem & bio weapons are all significantly complicated, to manufacture and deploy. All have likely blowback on the groups building and using them, and there are counter-measures against all too. For counter-proliferation we can walk and chew gum at the same time. If that's too difficult for you, please go back to optimizing click-through.