3 ms·
The micro-reactor designs I looked up generally fell into one of three categories: 1. Very high enrichment fuel because they need fast load-following, e.g. for
by pjscott 5y ago
The micro-reactor designs I looked up generally fell into one of three categories:
1. Very high enrichment fuel because they need fast load-following, e.g. for naval use.
2. Very high enrichment fuel because they're for use in space, and lower mass is better.
3. Reactors for ordinary power use, with fuel that's enriched more than most, but still nowhere near enough to be practically useful for weapons.
An example of #3 is the Westinghouse eVinci micro-reactor, which uses fuel enriched to a little under 20% U-235. Weapons-grade uranium is closer to 90%.
- godelski 5y agoPeople often confuse the difference in enrichment needed for weapons and reactors. Typically a reactor is 3% where a weapon is 97%. It becomes significantly harder to create that much enriched uranium which is why experts call Iran's production a bluff. Past their agreed levels, but nowhere near enough for weapons. The whole Iran deal relies on this fact actually.
- nonameiguess 5y agoCould make a dirty bomb still, but the risk from those is more psychological than real, which is probably why no one has ever tried to do it.
- drran 5y agos/no one/very few/ https://time.com/4728293/uranium-underworld-dark-secrets-dirty-bombs/ https://time.com/4728293/uranium-underworld-dark-secrets-dir...