DOCSLIB.ORG

Simple Calculation of the Critical Mass for Highly Enriched Uranium and Plutonium-239 Christopher F

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Simple Calculation of the Critical Mass for Highly Enriched Uranium and Plutonium-239 Christopher F Simple calculation of the critical mass for highly enriched uranium and plutonium-239 Christopher F. Chyba, and Caroline R. Milne Citation: American Journal of Physics 82, 977 (2014); doi: 10.1119/1.4885379 View online: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4885379 View Table of Contents: https://aapt.scitation.org/toc/ajp/82/10 Published by the American Association of Physics Teachers ARTICLES YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN Heisenberg and the critical mass American Journal of Physics 70, 911 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1495409 Note on the minimum critical mass for a tamped fission bomb core American Journal of Physics 83, 969 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4931721 Arthur Compton’s 1941 Report on explosive fission of U-235: A look at the physics American Journal of Physics 75, 1065 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2785193 A brief primer on tamped fission-bomb cores American Journal of Physics 77, 730 (2009); https://doi.org/10.1119/1.3125008 fissioncore: A desktop-computer simulation of a fission-bomb core American Journal of Physics 82, 972 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4894165 Estimate of the critical mass of a fissionable isotope American Journal of Physics 58, 363 (1990); https://doi.org/10.1119/1.16172 Simple calculation of the critical mass for highly enriched uranium and plutonium-239 Christopher F. Chybaa) Department of Astrophysical Sciences and Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544 Caroline R. Milneb) Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544 (Received 10 December 2013; accepted 13 June 2014) The correct calculation of and values for the critical mass of uranium or plutonium necessary for a nuclear fission weapon have long been understood and publicly available. The calculation requires solving the radial component in spherical coordinates of a diffusion equation with a source term, so is beyond the reach of most public policy and many first-year college physics students. Yet it is important for the basic physical ideas behind the calculation to be understood by those without calculus who are nonetheless interested in international security, arms control, or nuclear non-proliferation. This article estimates the critical mass in an intuitive way that requires only algebra. VC 2014 American Association of Physics Teachers. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.4885379] I. INTRODUCTION with a source term. This or simplified versions may also be found in a number of journal articles.5–9 Fissile materials are materials that can sustain an explo- 1 The ready availability of the derivation and the value of the sive fission chain reaction. A “threshold bare critical mass” critical mass for HEU and Pu assures that further publications in Mc (henceforth just “critical mass”) is the minimum mass of this realm cannot provide any significant information to states or fissile material that is needed for that chain reaction. At the terrorists pursuing nuclear weapons. However, a derivation ac- threshold critical mass, neutron production by fission within cessible to those without calculus could help ensure that the next a volume just balances neutron loss through the volume’s generation of students interested in international security, arms surface, and the number density of neutrons is constant in control, or nuclear non-proliferation has an intuitive quantitative time. A sphere gives the smallest Mc because a sphere mini- understanding of the critical mass needed for a nuclear explo- mizes the ratio of surface area to volume for a solid. “Bare” sion. We provide such a derivation here, in the hopes of captur- critical mass indicates that there is no neutron reflector; such ing the key physical ideas without doing too much damage to a component reflects neutrons that would otherwise escape the underlying physics through various simplifications. from the sphere back into its interior. The “critical radius” Rc is the radius of the sphere of fissile material corresponding to Mc. Real nuclear weapons may be II. A SIMPLE MODEL expected to employ neutron reflectors and implosive spheri- Hafemeister10 suggests following the simple physical pic- cal compression, both of which serve to reduce the amount 3 of fissile material below that of the bare critical mass.1 ture of Serber to derive Rc by equating neutron production rate PN due to nuclear fission within a spherical volume to Nevertheless, the value of Mc is a useful benchmark for the material requirements for a nuclear weapons program—for neutron loss rate LN through the boundary of that volume. example, the rapidity with which a potential nuclear prolifer- Hafemeister provides a straightforward estimate of PN within ator could produce a bomb’s worth of highly enriched ura- asphereofradiusR. Take the typical velocity v of a neutron nium (HEU) or plutonium-239 (Pu) from gas centrifuges or produced by a nuclear fission to be that corresponding to its nuclear reactors, respectively. (Weapons grade plutonium kinetic energy ( 2 MeV). This neutron has a mean free path produced in a plutonium production reactor is preferable for between fission events kf ¼ 1/nrf,whererf is the fission cross section and n is the number density of fissile nuclei.11 The nu- military purposes to power-reactor plutonium, but the latter À8 may also be used to produce a weapon, albeit with greater clear generation lifetime s ¼ kf/v 10 s is the correspond- difficulty.2) The value of the critical mass provides the fun- ing time between fissions. In each fission, an average number damental context for arms control efforts to constrain or of neutrons is produced. Let N bethefreeneutronnumber density in the sphere. (In reality, of course, N is a function of reduce fissile material stocks below a certain number of 3,4 equivalent warheads. A basic understanding of the derivation radial distance within the sphere, but it is interesting to see of the critical mass is therefore an important underpinning to how far one can go with a much simpler assumption.) Then PN is given by the total number of neutrons in the spherical key aspects of contemporary international security. 3 The standard derivation of the critical mass involves solv- sample, N(4/3)pR , times the net number of neutrons pro- ing a time-dependent diffusion equation with a source term, duced per neutron in a nuclear generation lifetime, ( À 1)/s, and may be found in Serber’s long-declassified Los Alamos where there term À 1 takes into account the loss of the ini- Primer3 and in Reed’s The Physics of the Manhattan tiating neutron in each fission event. We therefore have Project.4 At the threshold critical mass, the time dependence 4 3 À 1 disappears, and one is left with having to solve the radial PN ¼ N pR : (1) component in spherical coordinates of a diffusion equation 3 s 977 Am. J. Phys. 82 (10), October 2014 http://aapt.org/ajp VC 2014 American Association of Physics Teachers 977 The neutron loss rate LN is the trickier part of the estimate. We now describe the simple picture underlying our model, (Even Serber’s Los Alamos lectures had trouble setting up building on Hafemeister’s approach. We divide our fissile the condition at the loss boundary.3) For his simple model spherical mass into concentric layers. The interior layer is a Hafemeister puts sphere of radius R À x. The outer layer is a spherical shell of 2 thickness x with neutron number density N. In a time s, half LN ¼ 4pR Nv; (2) of these outer-layer neutrons—those whose net motion is radially outward—escape the shell and cause no fissions. saying that this represents the “neutron loss rate through an The other half, whose net motion is radially inward, contrib- area” but does not explain further. However, this expression ute to maintaining the constant number density N of the inner may be shown to result from an assumption that in a given nu- sphere. Each neutron present within this inner sphere causes clear generation lifetime all neutrons within a distance k of f a fission event in time s. the outer boundary of the sphere of fissile material escape the We therefore have, for neutron production, sphere, in an approximation where kf R. That is, the num- ber of neutrons in the outermost spherical shell of thickness kf 4 À 1 3 3 2 3 is just ½ð4=3ÞpR ð4=3ÞpðR À k Þ N 4pR k N,withthe PN ¼ N pðR À xÞ : (5) f f 3 s last approximation holding provided kf/R 1. If these neu- trons escape in time s,Eq.(2) follows because kf/s ¼ v.The Meanwhile, neutron loss from the outer layer during this critical radius R ¼ Rc then results from putting PN ¼ LN: same time period is given by 3vs 3 3 3 Rc ¼ ¼ kf : (3) N 4 R ðR À xÞ ð À 1Þ ð À 1Þ L ¼ p : (6) N 2 3 s There are several problems with this simple model. Clearly, Equating neutron production and loss (at which point not all neutrons within kf of the edge will escape, since most 3 3 will not have a purely radial velocity. Moreover, as Reed6 R Rc) gives Rc ¼ð2 À 1ÞðRc À xÞ ,or has emphasized, the cross section for neutron scattering in 1=3 both HEU and Pu is larger than the cross section for fission, 1 ð2 À 1Þ Rc ¼ pffiffiffiffiffi kf ; (7) so that scattering cannot be neglected even in a lowest-order 3g ð2 À 1Þ1=3 À 1 estimate. 12 Solving for numerical values emphasizes the problems.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table 2.Iii.1. Fissionable Isotopes1
    FISSIONABLE ISOTOPES Charles P. Blair Last revised: 2012 “While several isotopes are theoretically fissionable, RANNSAD defines fissionable isotopes as either uranium-233 or 235; plutonium 238, 239, 240, 241, or 242, or Americium-241. See, Ackerman, Asal, Bale, Blair and Rethemeyer, Anatomizing Radiological and Nuclear Non-State Adversaries: Identifying the Adversary, p. 99-101, footnote #10, TABLE 2.III.1. FISSIONABLE ISOTOPES1 Isotope Availability Possible Fission Bare Critical Weapon-types mass2 Uranium-233 MEDIUM: DOE reportedly stores Gun-type or implosion-type 15 kg more than one metric ton of U- 233.3 Uranium-235 HIGH: As of 2007, 1700 metric Gun-type or implosion-type 50 kg tons of HEU existed globally, in both civilian and military stocks.4 Plutonium- HIGH: A separated global stock of Implosion 10 kg 238 plutonium, both civilian and military, of over 500 tons.5 Implosion 10 kg Plutonium- Produced in military and civilian 239 reactor fuels. Typically, reactor Plutonium- grade plutonium (RGP) consists Implosion 40 kg 240 of roughly 60 percent plutonium- Plutonium- 239, 25 percent plutonium-240, Implosion 10-13 kg nine percent plutonium-241, five 241 percent plutonium-242 and one Plutonium- percent plutonium-2386 (these Implosion 89 -100 kg 242 percentages are influenced by how long the fuel is irradiated in the reactor).7 1 This table is drawn, in part, from Charles P. Blair, “Jihadists and Nuclear Weapons,” in Gary A. Ackerman and Jeremy Tamsett, ed., Jihadists and Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Growing Threat (New York: Taylor and Francis, 2009), pp. 196-197. See also, David Albright N 2 “Bare critical mass” refers to the absence of an initiator or a reflector.
    [Show full text]
  • Fuel Geometry Options for a Moderated Low-Enriched Uranium Kilowatt-Class Space Nuclear Reactor T ⁎ Leonardo De Holanda Mencarinia,B,Jeffrey C
    Nuclear Engineering and Design 340 (2018) 122–132 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Nuclear Engineering and Design journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/nucengdes Fuel geometry options for a moderated low-enriched uranium kilowatt-class space nuclear reactor T ⁎ Leonardo de Holanda Mencarinia,b,Jeffrey C. Kinga, a Nuclear Science and Engineering Program, Colorado School of Mines (CSM), 1500 Illinois St, Hill Hall, 80401 Golden, CO, USA b Subdivisão de Dados Nucleares - Instituto de Estudos Avançados (IEAv), Trevo Coronel Aviador José Alberto Albano do Amarante, n 1, 12228-001 São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil ABSTRACT A LEU-fueled space reactor would avoid the security concerns inherent with Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) fuel and could be attractive to signatory countries of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or commercial interests. The HEU-fueled Kilowatt Reactor Using Stirling Technology (KRUSTY) serves as a basis for a similar reactor fueled with LEU fuel. Based on MCNP6™ neutronics performance estimates, the size of a 5 kWe reactor fueled with 19.75 wt% enriched uranium-10 wt% molybdenum alloy fuel is adjusted to match the excess reactivity of KRUSTY. Then, zirconium hydride moderator is added to the core in four different configurations (a homogeneous fuel/moderator mixture and spherical, disc, and helical fuel geometries) to reduce the mass of uranium required to produce the same excess reactivity, decreasing the size of the reactor. The lowest mass reactor with a given moderator represents a balance between the reflector thickness and core diameter needed to maintain the multiplication factor equal to 1.035, with a H/D ratio of 1.81.
    [Show full text]
  • Reference Values for Nuclear Criticality Safety
    Nuclear Science ISBN 92-64-02333-X Reference Values for Nuclear Criticality Safety Homogeneous and Uniform UO2, “UNH”, PuO2 and “PuNH”, Moderated and Reflected by H2O A demonstration study by an Expert Group of the Working Party on Nuclear Criticality Safety for the OECD/NEA Nuclear Science Committee Final evaluation and report prepared by D. Mennerdahl (EMS, Sweden) Leading participants during the study W. Weber (GRS, Germany), Y. Naito (NAIS, Japan) and J. Anno (IRSN, France) Major organisations contributing with new calculation results EMS (Sweden), IPPE (Russia), IRSN (France), ORNL (US), Serco Ass. (UK) Reviewers of the final draft report include J.B. Briggs (INL), V. Rouyer (IRSN), S. Mitake (Japan), H. Okuno (Japan), Y. Rugama (OECD/NEA), R.M. Westfall (ORNL) © OECD 2006 NEA No. 5433 NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 30 democracies work together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Examining the Role of Nuclear Fusion in a Renewables-Based Energy Mix
    Re-examining the Role of Nuclear Fusion in a Renewables-Based Energy Mix T. E. G. Nicholasa,∗, T. P. Davisb, F. Federicia, J. E. Lelandc, B. S. Patela, C. Vincentd, S. H. Warda a York Plasma Institute, Department of Physics, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK b Department of Materials, University of Oxford, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PH c Department of Electrical Engineering and Electronics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GJ, UK d Centre for Advanced Instrumentation, Department of Physics, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LS, UK Abstract Fusion energy is often regarded as a long-term solution to the world's energy needs. However, even after solving the critical research challenges, engineer- ing and materials science will still impose significant constraints on the char- acteristics of a fusion power plant. Meanwhile, the global energy grid must transition to low-carbon sources by 2050 to prevent the worst effects of climate change. We review three factors affecting fusion's future trajectory: (1) the sig- nificant drop in the price of renewable energy, (2) the intermittency of renewable sources and implications for future energy grids, and (3) the recent proposition of intermediate-level nuclear waste as a product of fusion. Within the scenario assumed by our premises, we find that while there remains a clear motivation to develop fusion power plants, this motivation is likely weakened by the time they become available. We also conclude that most current fusion reactor designs do not take these factors into account and, to increase market penetration, fu- sion research should consider relaxed nuclear waste design criteria, raw material availability constraints and load-following designs with pulsed operation.
    [Show full text]
  • Compilation and Evaluation of Fission Yield Nuclear Data Iaea, Vienna, 2000 Iaea-Tecdoc-1168 Issn 1011–4289
    IAEA-TECDOC-1168 Compilation and evaluation of fission yield nuclear data Final report of a co-ordinated research project 1991–1996 December 2000 The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Nuclear Data Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria COMPILATION AND EVALUATION OF FISSION YIELD NUCLEAR DATA IAEA, VIENNA, 2000 IAEA-TECDOC-1168 ISSN 1011–4289 © IAEA, 2000 Printed by the IAEA in Austria December 2000 FOREWORD Fission product yields are required at several stages of the nuclear fuel cycle and are therefore included in all large international data files for reactor calculations and related applications. Such files are maintained and disseminated by the Nuclear Data Section of the IAEA as a member of an international data centres network. Users of these data are from the fields of reactor design and operation, waste management and nuclear materials safeguards, all of which are essential parts of the IAEA programme. In the 1980s, the number of measured fission yields increased so drastically that the manpower available for evaluating them to meet specific user needs was insufficient. To cope with this task, it was concluded in several meetings on fission product nuclear data, some of them convened by the IAEA, that international co-operation was required, and an IAEA co-ordinated research project (CRP) was recommended. This recommendation was endorsed by the International Nuclear Data Committee, an advisory body for the nuclear data programme of the IAEA. As a consequence, the CRP on the Compilation and Evaluation of Fission Yield Nuclear Data was initiated in 1991, after its scope, objectives and tasks had been defined by a preparatory meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Uranium (Nuclear)
    Uranium (Nuclear) Uranium at a Glance, 2016 Classification: Major Uses: What Is Uranium? nonrenewable electricity Uranium is a naturally occurring radioactive element, that is very hard U.S. Energy Consumption: U.S. Energy Production: and heavy and is classified as a metal. It is also one of the few elements 8.427 Q 8.427 Q that is easily fissioned. It is the fuel used by nuclear power plants. 8.65% 10.01% Uranium was formed when the Earth was created and is found in rocks all over the world. Rocks that contain a lot of uranium are called uranium Lighter Atom Splits Element ore, or pitch-blende. Uranium, although abundant, is a nonrenewable energy source. Neutron Uranium Three isotopes of uranium are found in nature, uranium-234, 235 + Energy FISSION Neutron uranium-235, and uranium-238. These numbers refer to the number of Neutron neutrons and protons in each atom. Uranium-235 is the form commonly Lighter used for energy production because, unlike the other isotopes, the Element nucleus splits easily when bombarded by a neutron. During fission, the uranium-235 atom absorbs a bombarding neutron, causing its nucleus to split apart into two atoms of lighter mass. The first nuclear power plant came online in Shippingport, PA in 1957. At the same time, the fission reaction releases thermal and radiant Since then, the industry has experienced dramatic shifts in fortune. energy, as well as releasing more neutrons. The newly released neutrons Through the mid 1960s, government and industry experimented with go on to bombard other uranium atoms, and the process repeats itself demonstration and small commercial plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Radioactive Decay
    North Berwick High School Department of Physics Higher Physics Unit 2 Particles and Waves Section 3 Fission and Fusion Section 3 Fission and Fusion Note Making Make a dictionary with the meanings of any new words. Einstein and nuclear energy 1. Write down Einstein’s famous equation along with units. 2. Explain the importance of this equation and its relevance to nuclear power. A basic model of the atom 1. Copy the components of the atom diagram and state the meanings of A and Z. 2. Copy the table on page 5 and state the difference between elements and isotopes. Radioactive decay 1. Explain what is meant by radioactive decay and copy the summary table for the three types of nuclear radiation. 2. Describe an alpha particle, including the reason for its short range and copy the panel showing Plutonium decay. 3. Describe a beta particle, including its range and copy the panel showing Tritium decay. 4. Describe a gamma ray, including its range. Fission: spontaneous decay and nuclear bombardment 1. Describe the differences between the two methods of decay and copy the equation on page 10. Nuclear fission and E = mc2 1. Explain what is meant by the terms ‘mass difference’ and ‘chain reaction’. 2. Copy the example showing the energy released during a fission reaction. 3. Briefly describe controlled fission in a nuclear reactor. Nuclear fusion: energy of the future? 1. Explain why nuclear fusion might be a preferred source of energy in the future. 2. Describe some of the difficulties associated with maintaining a controlled fusion reaction.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Intrinsic Nuclear Structure in Medium Mass Even-Even Xenon Isotopes from a Microscopic Perspective*
    Chinese Physics C Vol. 44, No. 7 (2020) 074108 Evolution of intrinsic nuclear structure in medium mass even-even Xenon isotopes from a microscopic perspective* Surbhi Gupta1 Ridham Bakshi1 Suram Singh2 Arun Bharti1;1) G. H. Bhat3 J. A. Sheikh4 1Department of Physics, University of Jammu, Jammu- 180006, India 2Department of Physics and Astronomical Sciences, Central University of Jammu, Samba- 181143, India 3Department of Physics, SP College, Cluster University Srinagar- 190001, India 4Cluster University Srinagar - Jammu and Kashmir 190001, India Abstract: In this study, the multi-quasiparticle triaxial projected shell model (TPSM) is applied to investigate γ-vi- brational bands in transitional nuclei of 118−128Xe. We report that each triaxial intrinsic state has a γ-band built on it. The TPSM approach is evaluated by the comparison of TPSM results with available experimental data, which shows a satisfactory agreement. The energy ratios, B(E2) transition rates, and signature splitting of the γ-vibrational band are calculated. Keywords: triaxial projected shell model, triaxiality, yrast spectra, band diagram, back-bending, staggering, reduced transition probabilities DOI: 10.1088/1674-1137/44/7/074108 1 Introduction In the past few decades, the use of improved and sophisticated experimental techniques has made it pos- sible to provide sufficient data to describe the structure of The static and dynamic properties of a nucleus pre- nuclei in various mass regions of the nuclear chart. In dominantly dictate its shape or structure, and these prop- particular, the transitional nuclei around mass A ∼ 130 erties depend on the interactions among its constituents, have numerous interesting features, such as odd-even i.e, protons and neutrons.
    [Show full text]
  • Reactor Plutonium and Nuclear Explosives
    Reactor Plutonium Utility in Nuclear Explosives* Bruce T. Goodwin, PhD Associate Director-at-Large for National Security & Policy Research *drawn from the work of Robert Selden November 6, 2015 LLNL-PRES-801535 This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC Outline Bottom Line Up Front Plutonium Description Critical Mass Radioactivity & Heat Neutron Background A Nuclear Explosive Conclusions Summary Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory LL-NSO-U-2015-######_2 Bottom line up front • “A potential proliferating state or subnational group using designs and technologies no more sophisticated than those used in first-generation nuclear weapons could build a nuclear weapon from reactor grade plutonium that would have an assured, reliable yield of one or a few kilotons (and a probable yield significantly higher than that)” * • “An advanced nuclear weapon states such as the United States and Russia, using modern designs, could produce weapons from reactor grade plutonium having reliable explosive yields, weight, and other characteristics generally comparable to those of weapons made from weapons grade plutonium” * * Quoted from: US Department of Energy Publication “Nonproliferation and Arms Control Assessment of Weapons-Usable Fissile Material Storage and Excess Plutonium Disposition Alternatives, January 1997 http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/425259 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory LL-NSO-U-2015-######_3
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Reactors Fuelled with Uranium Inevitably Produce Plutonium As a By-Product
    The Secretary Joint Standing Committee on Treaties Inquiry into Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament Dear Sir/Madam, I would like to submit the following submission to the Parliamentary Committee Inquiry into Nuclear Non- proliferation and Disarmament. Yours sincerely, Frank Barnaby. A submission to the Parliamentary Committee Inquiry into Nuclear Non- proliferation and Disarmament. Frank Barnaby Nuclear reactors fuelled with uranium inevitably produce plutonium as a by-product. This plutonium can be used by countries and by nuclear terrorists to fabricate nuclear weapons. The operation of nuclear-power reactors, therefore, has consequences for national, regional and global security. The more nuclear reactors there are the greater the security risks. Australia should recognise that these security risks outweigh the befits of producing electricity by nuclear power especially because the use of renewable sources of energy, combined with improvements in energy efficiency and the conservation of energy make the use of nuclear power unnecessary. As the world’s second largest exporter of uranium, Australia has a major responsibility to adopt policies to minimise the risks to security from nuclear proliferation and terrorism. To this end, Australia should use its influence to bring the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) into effect. It should not supply uranium to countries, like the USA and China, which have not yet ratified the CTBT. Moreover, Australia should promote the negotiation of a Comprehensive Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty to prohibit the further production of fissile material usable for the production of nuclear weapons, prohibit the reprocessing of spent nuclear-power reactor fuel that has been produced by Australian uranium and should not support or encourage the use of Mixed Oxide (MOX) nuclear fuel or the use of Generation IV reactors, particularly fast breeder reactors.
    [Show full text]
  • Beryllium – a Unique Material in Nuclear Applications
    INEEL/CON-04-01869 PREPRINT Beryllium – A Unique Material In Nuclear Applications T. A. Tomberlin November 15, 2004 36th International SAMPE Technical Conference This is a preprint of a paper intended for publication in a journal or proceedings. Since changes may be made before publication, this preprint should not be cited or reproduced without permission of the author. This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use, or the results of such use, of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights. The views expressed in this paper are not necessarily those of the U.S. Government or the sponsoring agency. BERYLLIUM – A UNIQUE MATERIAL IN NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS T. A. Tomberlin Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory P.O. Box 1625 2525 North Fremont Ave. Idaho Falls, ID 83415 E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Beryllium, due to its unique combination of structural, chemical, atomic number, and neutron absorption cross section characteristics, has been used successfully as a neutron reflector for three generations of nuclear test reactors at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). The Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), the largest test reactor in the world, has utilized five successive beryllium neutron reflectors and is scheduled for continued operation with a sixth beryllium reflector.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Weapons Technology 101 for Policy Wonks Bruce T
    NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY FOR POLICY WONKS NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY 101 FOR POLICY WONKS BRUCE T. GOODWIN BRUCE T. GOODWIN BRUCE T. Center for Global Security Research Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory August 2021 NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY 101 FOR POLICY WONKS BRUCE T. GOODWIN Center for Global Security Research Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory August 2021 NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY 101 FOR POLICY WONKS | 1 This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in part under Contract W-7405-Eng-48 and in part under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. The views and opinions of the author expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. ISBN-978-1-952565-11-3 LCCN-2021907474 LLNL-MI-823628 TID-61681 2 | BRUCE T. GOODWIN Table of Contents About the Author. 2 Introduction . .3 The Revolution in Physics That Led to the Bomb . 4 The Nuclear Arms Race Begins. 6 Fission and Fusion are "Natural" Processes . 7 The Basics of the Operation of Nuclear Explosives. 8 The Atom . .9 Isotopes . .9 Half-life . 10 Fission . 10 Chain Reaction . 11 Critical Mass . 11 Fusion . 14 Types of Nuclear Weapons . 16 Finally, How Nuclear Weapons Work . 19 Fission Explosives . 19 Fusion Explosives . 22 Staged Thermonuclear Explosives: the H-bomb . 23 The Modern, Miniature Hydrogen Bomb . 25 Intrinsically Safe Nuclear Weapons . 32 Underground Testing . 35 The End of Nuclear Testing and the Advent of Science-Based Stockpile Stewardship . 39 Stockpile Stewardship Today . 41 Appendix 1: The Nuclear Weapons Complex .
    [Show full text]