Read other letters about this article

• Thursday, September 11, 2008 01:36 PM

  Godot, you are pretty dumb

  Xanthro--The largest weapons ever made would have couldn't even take out a medium sized city.

  Tell that to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those were considered tiny by modern standards. How stupid can you get, neocon?

  It appears you are as ignorant of history as every other subject you have touched. You don't even know the effects of the weapons in question, or anything about them.

  The Little Boy at 13 kilotons had a destructive blast radius of one mile, killing approximately 70,000. 45,000 in the initial blast, and 19,000 in the next four months. The closest known survivor was Eizo Nomura at 100 meters from ground zero.

  The June Rice Rations for the city indicated a population of 255,000. See the Oughterson Commission study. Approximately, 25.5% of the population died in the first four months.

  While the devastation was horrible, the vast majority of the population survived.

  You talked of roaches not surviving, atomic-bombs couldn't even reach a 50% human kill ratio under near ideal conditions. Even dropping a score of such bombs on Hiroshima would not have killed 100% of the population.

  Xanhtro--There was no accidental nuclear detonation, which is quite frankly something that can't happen by accident.

  As if you know anything about it:

  I know far more about it than you'll ever be able to look up on the internet.

  You lack even basic knowledge about nuclear power, so you present "evidence" which you think advances you case, when it actuality it defeats it. That is because you are too ignorant to know how to interpret the data you present.

  Ural Mountains Radiation Pollution

  1957 Kystym Explosion

  http://www.american.edu/ted/ural.htm

  The Kystym explosion is not a nuclear detonation. As I stated, you can get heat, and radiation release, but you can't have an accidental nuclear denotation. Notice, I didn't say explosion. One could argue that blowing up a granite countertop is a nuclear explosion, because radiation will be released.

  At Kystym heat built up and caused an explosion, not a nuclear detonation. Notice the yield, "The resulting explosion had a force of 75 tons of TNT." Even the earliest nuclear weapons were measure in kilotons of TNT. The little boy was a 13,000 tons weapon. You might notice that 13,000 is a substantially higher number than 75.

  If you took all the weapons grade material in the World and placed it in a pit without cooling, eventually the heat would build to the point where the mass would explode. This would in no way be considered a nuclear detonation.

  Xanthro--No, in fact, both US and Russian space agencies are currently suffering from an acute shortage of plutonium. Russia has almost all the remaining stockpile, measured in a few kilograms, and that stock pile will be depleted in a few years.

  As if you know anything but your own lies - 34 tons is all the US State Department will admit to the Russians having:

  Russian Plutonium Poses Major Risk

  U.S. efforts to dispose of excess plutonium were closely tied to those in Russia, which also declared 34 metric tons of plutonium as excess to weapons needs

  http://www.forbes.com/business/2007/10/17/us-plutonium-disposal-cx_1018oxford.html

  Boy, don't you feel stupid.-- Godot..

  I overestimated your intelligence, an error I won't make again. I thought that perhaps you'd actually search "space plutonium" but that seems too difficult for you.

  A brief primer is in order. There are various types of plutonium, they are listed by isotope number. Such as Plutonium-238 which is a specific type of non-weapon grade plutonium. It is used in 'radioisotope thermoelectric generators' (RTGs) of some cardiac pacemakers, space satellites, navigation beacons, etc. This is what I was talking running out of. The US hasn't manufactured any since the 1980s. Only a few kilograms are left in the World, and they are in Russia's hands.

  There are many types of Plutonium.

  Plutonium is a by-product of certain types of nuclear power plants. Plutonium 239 and 240 is most commonly produced. 240 has a high rate of spontaneous fission which makes it highly unsuitable for use in nuclear weapons, but good for reactor fuel. In fact, it is the ratio of 239/240 that determines Plutonium's usage. 239 with less than 7% 240 is considered weapons grade, greater than 19% is considered reactor grade. Reactor grade can't be used effectively in nuclear weapons, the aforementioned spontaneous fission is the problem.

  Also, 241 is produced, which when it decays produces Americium which interferes with MOX (mixed-oxide fuel) production. MOX is used in certain reactors as a fuel source. The US has 3 such reactors I believe.

  BTW, there aren't 34 tons, or 69 tons off ALL types of Plutonium, but thousands of tonnes.

  A 1,000 MWe light water reactor (LWR) produces about 300 kilograms of Plutonium yearly. There are far more than 4 such reactors in the World.

  I had hopped that you'd actually research, and educate yourself at least a tiny bit, by peaking your interest in how the US Space Program is running out of Plutonium, but in this I have failed.

  To end, no, the United States can't end all life on Earth, no can the spent fuel and waste stored in Russia actually detonate in an actual nuclear blast.

  —Xanthro Read Xanthro's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel