DOCSLIB.ORG

Commercial Grade Plutonium Will Have a Large Fraction of Its Content As Plutonium-240 with Its High Spontaneous Fission Rate

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Commercial Grade Plutonium Will Have a Large Fraction of Its Content As Plutonium-240 with Its High Spontaneous Fission Rate UCRL-TT-112792 T RA N S L A T 1 0 N Report on The Useability of Reactor Plutonium in Weapons TRANSLATED FROM ORIGINAL TITLE Bericht zur Waffentauglichkeit von Reaktorplutonium AUTHORS Egbert Kankeleit-Christian Küppers-Ulrich Imkeller SOURCE Institute fur Kernphysik Technische Hochschule Darmstadt December 1989 TRANSLATED DATE LLNL REF NO: 21 january 1993 04191 TRANSLATED FOR: TRANSLATED BY: Lawrance Livermare Berkeley Scientific National Laboratory Translation Service Livermore, CA 94550 510 548-4665 Report on the Useability of Reactor Plutonium in Weapons Egbert Kankeleit Christian Küppers* Ulrich Imkeller Institute of Nuclear Physics Technical College Darmstadt December 1989 Expanded report on the occasion of the testimony given by experts on the issue I'Danger of Atomic Weapon Proliferation1' in the Hessian Parliament on 6/15/1984 *Christian Küppers is with the Ecology Institute of Darmstadt 1 Introduction This report endeavors to explore the issue of whether it is possible to build atomic weapons by making use of “reactor plutonium,” i.e., plutonium obtained in power-generating reactors. In the USA, scientists who were themselves active in atomic weapon projects have made public statements of their fear of misuse of reactor plutonium for weapons purposes since the early seventies. In the Federal Republic, the question of possible misuse continues to be important, even after the stoppage of construction of the reprocessing plant at Wackersdorf, since the processing of fuel elements and the separation of reactor plutonium continue to be the primary goal of the disposal policy. There are also horizontal proliferation problems associated with a transfer of technology. The boundary between civilian and military use is blurred. The so-called "home-rigged bomb" is, to be sure, unrealistic. All the more reason to inquire into the capabilities of a country, whether a highly developed industrial nation or a nation of the so-called Third World, which is using nuclear energy. As well as assess the capabilities of a technically trained group of terrorists. This version is a revision of the report with the same title of May 1988. The bibliography has not been updated. The situation discussed is as of July 186. The first chapter consists of a historical survey and contains: · a review of international literature regarding opinions as to the useability of reactor plutonium for weapons, · a survey of proposed methods of making plutonium artificially unsuitable for weapons, · an evaluation of the discussion held in the Federal Republic of Germany on the useability of reactor plutonium for weapons. The second chapter deals with special problems in the handling of reactor plutonium for weapons purposes and several additional physical aspects, including: · projectile techniques for compacting "subcritical" masses into "critical" ones, · formation and composition of plutonium isotopes in fuel elements, 2 · handling of reactor plutonium with respect to effects of radioactive radiation and the concomitant release of heat, · influences of radiation and heat output on a chemical explosive charge, · reasons for the use of weapons-grade plutonium by the established nuclear- armed states. The third chapter discusses the preignition problem of a plutonium fission bomb. The intention is to refine the figures cited on the statistics of the energy liberation (yield). Of course, in the time allotted to us for this work, we were not able to examine all existing material, or to cite, much less evaluate, all material examined. But neither have we made a onesided choice of the material cited by us. First, an explanation of some of the concepts used hereafter: By weapons-grade plutonium is generally meant plutonium having less than 7% of the isotope plutonium-240, in addition to plutonium-239. Chapter 2.1 and 3 explain in greater detail why plutonium-240 influences the quality of the plutonium for weapons purposes. By reactor plutonium we mean - in keeping with the conventional definition - plutonium that has been produced in light water reactors for production of electricity. For reasons of economy, the fuel is allowed to remain in the reactor until the isotopes plutonium-238, plutonium-240, plutonium-241 and plutonium- 242 are formed in significant quantities, in addition to plutonium239. A typical isotope composition of reactor plutonium might 2 be, e.g.: 1. 5% 238pU; 56.5% 239Pu; 26. 5% 241pU; 11. 5% 241 Pu and 4 l% 42pU [ALKE82]. The brisance (in English, Ilyield") of an atomic weapon is generally given as the TNT (trinitrotoluene) equivalent. For example, an atomic weapon of 1 kiloton (kT) TNT has the same explosive power as 1 kiloton (1000 tons) of the explosive TNT. The burn-up of fuel elements is a measure of the energy produced from them by nuclear fission. Typical thermal powers of nuclear power plants (e.g., Biblis A) lie in the range of 3 GW (3 109 W) , and the fuel inventory amounts to roughly 100 T uranium. With an operating life of around three years for the fuel elements, the energy produced is (3 GW/100 T) 3 365d = 33 GWd per T. For weapons- grade plutonium, the burn-up is under 5 GWd/t. 3 Table of Contents 1. State of Discussion Of the Useability of Reactor Plutonium for Weapons in Retrospect 1.1 International Developments Since the Discovery of Plutonium 1.2 Proposals for the Denaturing of Plutonium Since the Mid Seventies 1.3 Views Regarding the Useability of Reactor Plutonium for Weaponry in the Federal Republic of Germany 2. Special Problems in the Handling of Reactor Plutonium for Weapons Purposes 2.1 Blasting Techniques in Plutonium Bonds 2.2 Formation of Pu-Isotopes in Fuel Elements and the Neutron Background 2.3 The Neutron Source for Initiation of a Chain Reaction 2.4 Handling of Reactor-Grade Plutonium 2.4.1 Dose Load from Radioactive Radiation 2.4.2 Heat Liberated by Radioactivity 2.4.3 Self-Ignition in Plutonium Processing 2.5 Influences of Reactor Plutonium on an Explosive Charge 2.5.1 Influences of Radioactive Radiation 2.5.2 Influences of Thermal Output 2.6 Traceability of Reactor Plutonium Through Its Radiation 2.7 Reasons of Nuclear-Armed States for the Use of Weapons-Grade Plutonium 3. Estimates on the Likelihood of Preignition 4. Supplement 4 1. State of Discussion of the Useability of Reactor Plutonium for Weapons in Retrospect 1.1 International Developments Since the Discovery of Plutonium The plutonium--239 used for the first experiments had been produced in the cyclotron of Berkeley (USA) from 1940 on. The first larger quantities were obtained in a reactor at Clinton, Tennessee, and they contained the first significant amount of the spontaneously fissioning isotope, plutonium-240. Studies on this (at the time) reactor-grade plutonium revealed, in July 1943, a much larger emission of neutrons than that of pure plutonium-239. This was a heavy setback for the Manhattan Project, occupied in the development of the first atomic bombs, since this plutonium could no longer be used with the colliding-impact techniques of critical configurations developed at the time [HAWK61). But suf f icient quantities of plutonium f or construction of bombs could only be produced by means of a reactor, so that the goal of a plutonium bomb was quickly placed on the back burner. The much-cited "Los Alamos Primer" [SERB43] of April 1943, being an introductory course to the Manhattan Project, declassified in 1961, is still unaware of the isotope plutonium-240 and the difficulties associated with it. The configurations of subcritical masses that are supposed to form critical masses when hurled together, as explained in the primer, although very diversified, did not yet include the implosion method. Within a year, the then-new explosive lens technique was developed, also making this plutonium suitable for the first test in July 1945. The energy yield produced was far greater than most expectations of the scientists involved in construction of the bomb (see also Chapter 2.1). Such plutonium, which is unsuitable for weapons purposes because of its isotope mixture, had already been termed 11denatured.11 One of the discoverers of plutonium, Glenn T. Seaborg, reported in 1976 that he had explicitly pointed out already in 1945, especially in written opinions on drafts of the so-called Franck Report, that such a "denaturing" with the isotope plutonium-240 alone is not possible [WOHL77]. He was disappointed in not finding this fact mentioned either in the Franck Report of 11 June 1945 or the Acheson-Lilienthal Report [ACHE46] of 16 March 1946. (These two reports constitute an early common effort of scientists, the military, and politicians to assess and influence, as they saw fit, the consequences of the newly-emerging atomic technology.) The Acheson-Lilienthal Report stated that plutonium could be denatured so as to prevent the construction of effective atomic weapons by any (then) known technique. A technical development that made possible such construction would require more strenuous scientific and technical exertions. On the other hand, reactors could be allowed to operate with the denatured material. In any case, the Acheson-Lilienthal Report stipulated: 5 "only a constant re-examination of what is sure to be a rapidly changing technical situation will give us added confidence that the line between what is dangerous and what is safe has been correctly drawn; if it will not stay fixed." The representative of the United States in the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission, Bernard M. Baruch, submitted a plan to the United Nations on 14 June 1946 for handing over all fissionable material to an international agency. The proposal was known as the "Baruch Plan" [BARU46] and it contains a passage taken from a press release of the Department of State on 9 April 1946: "In some cases denaturing will not completely preclude making atomic weapons, but will reduce their effectiveness by a large factor..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2012 04 Newsletter
    United States Atmospheric & Underwater Atomic Weapon Activities National Association of Atomic Veterans, Inc. 1945 “TRINITY“ “Assisting America’s Atomic Veterans Since 1979” ALAMOGORDO, N. M. Website: www.naav.com E-mail: [email protected] 1945 “LITTLE BOY“ HIROSHIMA, JAPAN R. J. RITTER - Editor April, 2012 1945 “FAT MAN“ NAGASAKI, JAPAN 1946 “CROSSROADS“ BIKINI ISLAND 1948 “SANDSTONE“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1951 “RANGER“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1951 “GREENHOUSE“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1951 “BUSTER – JANGLE“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1952 “TUMBLER - SNAPPER“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1952 “IVY“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1953 “UPSHOT - KNOTHOLE“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1954 “CASTLE“ BIKINI ISLAND 1955 “TEAPOT“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1955 “WIGWAM“ OFFSHORE SAN DIEGO 1955 “PROJECT 56“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1956 “REDWING“ ENEWETAK & BIKINI 1957 “PLUMBOB“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1958 “HARDTACK-I“ ENEWETAK & BIKINI 1958 “NEWSREEL“ JOHNSTON ISLAND 1958 “ARGUS“ SOUTH ATLANTIC 1958 “HARDTACK-II“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1961 “NOUGAT“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1962 “DOMINIC-I“ CHRISTMAS ISLAND JOHNSTON ISLAND 1965 “FLINTLOCK“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1969 “MANDREL“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1971 “GROMMET“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1974 “POST TEST EVENTS“ ENEWETAK CLEANUP ------------ “ IF YOU WERE THERE, YOU ARE AN ATOMIC VETERAN “ The Newsletter for America’s Atomic Veterans COMMANDER’S COMMENTS knowing the seriousness of the situation, did not register any Outreach Update: First, let me extend our discomfort, or dissatisfaction on her part. As a matter of fact, it thanks to the membership and friends of NAAV was kind of nice to have some of those callers express their for supporting our “outreach” efforts over the thanks for her kind attention and assistance. We will continue past several years. It is that firm dedication to to insure that all inquires, along these lines, are fully and our Mission-Statement that has driven our adequately addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonproliferation and Nuclear Forensics: Detailed, Multi- Analytical Investigation of Trinitite Post-Detonation Materials
    SIMONETTI ET AL. CHAPTER 14: NONPROLIFERATION AND NUCLEAR FORENSICS: DETAILED, MULTI- ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATION OF TRINITITE POST-DETONATION MATERIALS Antonio Simonetti, Jeremy J. Bellucci, Christine Wallace, Elizabeth Koeman, and Peter C. Burns, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, 46544, USA e-mail: [email protected] INTRODUCTION (and ≤7% 240Pu), whereas it is termed “reactor fuel In 2010, the Joint Working Group of the grade” if the material consists >8% 240Pu. American Physical Society and the American Production of enriched U is costly and an energy- Association for the Advancement of Science defined intensive process, and the most widely used Nuclear Forensics as “the technical means by which processes are gaseous diffusion of UF6 (employed nuclear materials, whether intercepted intact or by the United States and France) and high- retrieved from post-explosion debris, are performance centrifugation of UF6 (e.g., Russia, characterized (as to composition, physical condition, Europe, and South Africa). The uranium processed age, provenance, history) and interpreted (as to under the “Manhattan Project” and used within the provenance, industrial history, and implications for device detonated over Hiroshima was produced by nuclear device design).” Detailed investigation of electromagnetic separation; the latter process was post-detonation material (PDM) is critical in ultimately abandoned in the late 1940s because of preventing and/or responding to nuclear-based its significant energy demands. The minimum terrorist activities/threats. However, accurate amount of fissionable material required for a nuclear identification of nuclear device components within reaction is termed its “critical mass”, and the value PDM typically requires a variety of instrumental depends on the isotope employed, properties of approaches and sample characterization strategies; materials, local environment, and weapon design the latter may include radiochemical separations, (Moody et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Trinity Scientific Firsts
    TRINITY SCIENTIFIC FIRSTS THE TRINITY TEST was perhaps the greatest scientifi c experiment ever. Seventy-fi ve years ago, Los Alamos scientists and engineers from the U.S., Britain, and Canada changed the world. July 16, 1945 marks the entry into the Atomic Age. PLUTONIUM: THE BETHE-FEYNMAN FORMULA: Scientists confi rmed the newly discovered 239Pu has attractive nuclear Nobel Laureates Hans Bethe and Richard Feynman developed the physics fi ssion properties for an atomic weapon. They were able to discern which equation used to estimate the yield of a fi ssion weapon, building on earlier production path would be most effective based on nuclear chemistry, and work by Otto Frisch and Rudolf Peierls. The equation elegantly encapsulates separated plutonium from Hanford reactor fuel. essential physics involved in the nuclear explosion process. PRECISION HIGH-EXPLOSIVE IMPLOSION FOUNDATIONAL RADIOCHEMICAL TO CREATE A SUPER-CRITICAL ASSEMBLY: YIELD ANALYSIS: Project Y scientists developed simultaneously-exploding bridgewire detonators Wartime radiochemistry techniques developed and used at Trinity with a pioneering high-explosive lens system to create a symmetrically provide the foundation for subsequent analyses of nuclear detonations, convergent detonation wave to compress the core. both foreign and domestic. ADVANCED IMAGING TECHNIQUES: NEW FRONTIERS IN COMPUTING: Complementary diagnostics were developed to optimize the implosion Human computers and IBM punched-card machines together calculated design, including fl ash x-radiography, the RaLa method,
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
    J Radioanal Nucl Chem (2013) 298:993–1003 DOI 10.1007/s10967-013-2497-8 A multi-method approach for determination of radionuclide distribution in trinitite Christine Wallace • Jeremy J. Bellucci • Antonio Simonetti • Tim Hainley • Elizabeth C. Koeman • Peter C. Burns Received: 21 January 2013 / Published online: 13 April 2013 Ó Akade´miai Kiado´, Budapest, Hungary 2013 Abstract The spatial distribution of radiation within trin- The results from this study indicate that the device-related ititethinsectionshavebeenmappedusingalphatrack radionuclides were preferentially incorporated into the radiography and beta autoradiography in combination with glassy matrix in trinitite. optical microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. Alpha and beta maps have identified areas of higher activity, Keywords Trinitite Á Nuclear forensics Á Radionuclides Á and these are concentrated predominantly within the surfi- Fission and activation products Á Laser ablation inductively cial glassy component of trinitite. Laser ablation-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) analyses conducted at high spatial resolution yield weighted average 235U/238Uand240Pu/239Pu ratios of 0.00718 ± 0.00018 (2r) Introduction and 0.0208 ± 0.0012 (2r), respectively, and also reveal the presence of some fission (137Cs) and activation products Nuclear proliferation and terrorism are arguably the gravest (152,154Eu). The LA-ICP-MS results indicate positive cor- of threats to the security of any nation. The ability to relations between Pu ion signal intensities and abundances decipher forensic signatures in post-detonation nuclear of Fe, Ca, U and 137Cs. These trends suggest that Pu in debris is essential, both to provide a deterrence and to trinitite is associated with remnants of certain chemical permit a response to an incident.
    [Show full text]
  • NUCLEAR WEAPONS EFFECTS Introduction: the Energy Characteristics and Output from Nuclear Weapons Differ Significantly from Conve
    NUCLEAR WEAPONS EFFECTS Introduction: The energy characteristics and output from nuclear weapons differ significantly from conventional weapons. Nuclear detonations exhibit much higher temperature within the fireball and produce peak temperatures of several hundred million degrees and intense x-ray heating that results in air pressure pulses of several million atmospheres. Conventional chemical explosions result in much lower temperatures and release the bulk of their energy as air blast and shock waves. In an atmospheric detonation, such as was deployed in Japan, it is the blast and thermal component of the nuclear explosion that is the major factor in destruction and death, not nuclear radiation, as the public believes. The effective range of immediate harm to humans from nuclear radiation from the atmospheric explosion is much less than the effective range from blast and thermal heating. In order to limit the discussion of weapons effects to elementary terms, this discussion is based upon a single worst-case scenario. Probably the largest weapon that might be employed against a population would have a yield of less than one-megaton (or 1 million tons of TNT equivalent energy or simply 1 MT). However, a crude terrorist nuclear device would probably be in the range of a few thousand tons of TNT equivalent energy or a few KT). The discussion here is based upon a nuclear detonation of 1 MT. Yield: The destructive power of a nuclear weapon, when compared to the same amount of energy produced by TNT is defined as the ‘yield’ of the nuclear weapon. A 20-kiloton (KT) weapon, such as was detonated over Japan in World War II was equivalent in energy yield to 20,000 tons of TNT.
    [Show full text]
  • The Russian-A(Merican) Bomb: the Role of Espionage in the Soviet Atomic Bomb Project
    J. Undergrad. Sci. 3: 103-108 (Summer 1996) History of Science The Russian-A(merican) Bomb: The Role of Espionage in the Soviet Atomic Bomb Project MICHAEL I. SCHWARTZ physicists and project coordinators ought to be analyzed so as to achieve an understanding of the project itself, and given the circumstances and problems of the project, just how Introduction successful those scientists could have been. Third and fi- nally, the role that espionage played will be analyzed, in- There was no “Russian” atomic bomb. There only vestigating the various pieces of information handed over was an American one, masterfully discovered by by Soviet spies and its overall usefulness and contribution Soviet spies.”1 to the bomb project. This claim echoes a new theme in Russia regarding Soviet Nuclear Physics—Pre-World War II the Soviet atomic bomb project that has arisen since the democratic revolution of the 1990s. The release of the KGB As aforementioned, Paul Josephson believes that by (Commissariat for State Security) documents regarding the the eve of the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union, Soviet sci- role that espionage played in the Soviet atomic bomb project entists had the technical capability to embark upon an atom- has raised new questions about one of the most remark- ics weapons program. He cites the significant contributions able and rapid scientific developments in history. Despite made by Soviet physicists to the growing international study both the advanced state of Soviet nuclear physics in the of the nucleus, including the 1932 splitting of the lithium atom years leading up to World War II and reported scientific by proton bombardment,7 Igor Kurchatov’s 1935 discovery achievements of the actual Soviet atomic bomb project, of the isomerism of artificially radioactive atoms, and the strong evidence will be provided that suggests that the So- fact that L.
    [Show full text]
  • Radioactivity in Trinitite Daniela Pittauerová1; William M
    Radioactivity in Trinitite Daniela Pittauerová1; William M. Kolb 2; Jon C. Rosenstiel 3; Helmut W. Fischer 1 1 Institute of Environmental Physics, University of Bremen, Bremen, GERMANY, [email protected] 2 Retired, Edgewater, MD, U.S.A., 3 Retired, Anaheim, CA, U.S.A. Introduction RDS-1 Results and conclusions 1949 ATOMSITE - a fused glass-like material Trinity Gerboise Bleue Tab. 1: List of detected artificial gamma emitters in Trinitite and their origin 1945 1960 formed during ground - level nuclear tests Isotope Half-live (yr) Origin TRINITITE – a more widely used name for 60 Co 5.3 Activation of 59 Co – from test tower steel and from soil atomsite from Trinity site 133 132 Ba 10.5 Activation of Ba. Baratol - Ba (NO 3)2 - was part of explosive lens system of TRINITY – The World ´s first nuclear explosion, conducted in the desert in White Sands Missile the Trinity device Range, New Mexico, USA, on July 16, 1945. Plutonium bomb, detonated on a 30 m tower, yield 137 Cs 30.0 Fission product (beta decay of 137 Xe and 137 I and also independently) estimated to 20 kt TNT. 152, 154 151,153 RDS-1 (JOE-1) - The USSR first nuclear test at the Semipalatinsk site in Kazakhstan on August Eu 13.3 / 8.8 Activation of stable isotopes Eu in soil by slow neutrons 29, 1949. Plutonium bomb, design similar to that in Trinity, detonated on a 30 m tower, yield 155 Eu 4.8 Fission product, found to be detectable in Trinitite after more than 13 half-lives estimated to 20 kt TNT.
    [Show full text]
  • Undergraduate Lecture Notes in Physics
    Undergraduate Lecture Notes in Physics Series Editors Neil Ashby William Brantley Michael Fowler Michael Inglis Elena Sassi Helmy S. Sherif Heinz Klose For further volumes: http://www.springer.com/series/8917 Undergraduate Lecture Notes in Physics (ULNP) publishes authoritative texts covering topics throughout pure and applied physics. Each title in the series is suitable as a basis for undergraduate instruction, typically containing practice problems, worked examples, chapter summaries, and suggestions for further reading. ULNP titles must provide at least one of the following: • An exceptionally clear and concise treatment of a standard undergraduate subject. • A solid undergraduate-level introduction to a graduate, advanced, or non-stan- dard subject. • A novel perspective or an unusual approach to teaching a subject. ULNP especially encourages new, original, and idiosyncratic approaches to physics teaching at the undergraduate level. The purpose of ULNP is to provide intriguing, absorbing books that will continue to be the reader’s preferred reference throughout their academic career. Series Editors Neil Ashby Professor, Professor Emeritus, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA William Brantley Professor, Furman University, Greenville, SC, USA Michael Fowler Professor, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA Michael Inglis Professor, SUNY Suffolk County Community College, Selden, NY, USA Elena Sassi Professor, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy Helmy Sherif Professor Emeritus, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada Bruce Cameron Reed The History and Science of the Manhattan Project 123 Bruce Cameron Reed Department of Physics Alma College Alma, MI USA ISSN 2192-4791 ISSN 2192-4805 (electronic) ISBN 978-3-642-40296-8 ISBN 978-3-642-40297-5 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-40297-5 Springer Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London Library of Congress Control Number: 2013946925 Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014 This work is subject to copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Energy and Power1
    1. Energy and Power1 © John Dawson At the end of the Cretaceous period, the golden age of dinosaurs, an asteroid or comet about 10 miles in diameter headed directly towards the Earth with a velocity of about 20 miles per second, over ten times faster than our speediest bullets. Many such large objects may have come close to the Earth, but this was the one that finally hit. It hardly noticed the air as it plunged through the atmosphere in a fraction of a second, momentarily leaving a trail of vacuum behind it. It hit the Earth with such force that it and the rock near it were suddenly heated to a temperature of over a million degrees Centigrade, several hundred times hotter than the surface of the sun. Asteroid, rock, and water (if it hit in the ocean) were instantly vaporized. The energy released in the explosion was greater than that of a hundred million megatons of TNT, 100 teratons, more than ten thousand times greater than the total U.S. and Soviet nuclear arsenals. Before a minute had passed, the expanding crater was 60 miles across and 20 miles deep. It would soon grow even larger. Hot vaporized material from the impact had already blasted its way out through most of the atmosphere to an altitude of 15 miles. Material that a moment earlier had been glowing plasma was beginning to cool and condense into dust and rock that would be spread worldwide. Few people are surprised by the fact that an asteroid, the size of Mt. Everest, could do a lot of damage when it hits the Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Tech Area 11: a History
    CONTRACTOR REPORT SAND98-I617 Unlimited Release Tech Area 11: A History Rebecca UIlrich Ktech Corporation 7831 Marble, N.E. Albuquerque, NM 87110 Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 and Livermore, California 94550 Sandia is a muitiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Printed July 1998 (iE)Sandia National laboratories Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Govern- ment nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, prod- uct, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe pri- vately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Govern- ment, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Gar Alperovitz and the Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb
    Advances in Historical Studies 2013. Vol.2, No.2, 46-53 Published Online June 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ahs) DOI:10.4236/ahs.2013.22008 Reclaiming Realism for the Left: Gar Alperovitz and the Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb Peter N. Kirstein History Department, St. Xavier University, Chicago, USA Email: [email protected] Received December 24th, 2012; revised February 14th, 2013; accepted February 22nd, 2013 Copyright © 2013 Peter N. Kirstein. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons At- tribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Sixty-seven years after the decision to use the atomic bomb in World War II, controversy remains whether the United States was justified in using fission bombs in combat. Gar Alperovitz, the great revi- sionist historian, in his Atomic Diplomacy and The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb transformed our knowledge of the geopolitical motives behind the atomic attack against Japan at the end of World War II. These uranium and plutonium-core bombs were political, not primarily military in purpose and motive behind their deployment. His analysis will be compared to realists such as Hans Morgenthau, Kenneth Waltz, Henry Kissinger and George Kennan who for the most part questioned unrestrained violence and offered nuanced views on the wisdom of using such indiscriminate, savage weapons of war. The paper will explore Alperovitz’s classic argument that out of the ashes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the A-bomb drove the incipient Cold War conflict. American national-security elites construed the bomb as a political- diplomatic lever to contain Soviet power as much as a military weapon to subdue Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydronuclear Testing Or a Comprehensive Test Ban?
    Hydronuclear Testing or a Comprehensive Test Ban? Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. 1350 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tele: (202) 783-7800 Fax: (202) 783-5917 Hydronuclear tests--tests of nuclear weapons at yields less than about two kilograms of TNT equivalent--are useful for the assessment of new designs and the safety of existing designs. Hydronuclear tests can serve a useful role in the development of the full spectrum of unboosted fission weapons, including first generation nuclear weapons of the implosion type with yields in the 10 to 30 kiloton range, more sophisticated designs with yields up to about a megaton, and advanced micro-nuclear weapons with yields of 5 to 500 tons. Since hydronuclear tests do not generate sufficient yield to create the conditions for fusion of deuterium and tritium in the core, such tests do not provide a reliable means if extrapolating the performance of new "boosted" fission weapons and thermonuclear primaries, or advanced thermonuclear secondaries. In negotiating the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) the current strategy of the U.S. Government is not to define in the treaty what constitutes a nuclear test. If this strategy is successful and the treaty is ratified, the U.S. Government will interpret the CTBT to permit hydronuclear testing if such a test is conducted by any other country. A program of hydronuclear testing by any of the weapon states will encourage the others to conduct similar tests, with the results of undermining the purpose of the treaty. If hydronuclear tests are permitted under a CTB, the nuclear test sites of declared nuclear powers may be maintained, in part, to facilitate the conduct of hydronuclear tests.
    [Show full text]