The Command Post
Global Recon
« Special Report: Pakistan's Nuclear Scandal | Main | 43 Die in Iranian Airliner Crash »
February 09, 2004
US-Russo Plan to Destroy Weapons-Grade Plutonium Delayed
NY Times reports:
A project to destroy the plutonium from thousands of retired Russian and American nuclear weapons has been delayed, and some experts say they fear that the work may never be done.
Current plans have been put on hold until at least May of next year, it was originally planned for this July.
The immediate reason is that the United States and Russia are deadlocked on the liability rules for American workers and contractors that would help build the plant in Russia, and the United States will not break ground first. Each plant is to dispose of about 34 tons of weapons plutonium.

Administration officials want to use terms written for early nuclear agreements that protect American contractors from almost all liability in case of accidents involving the release of radioactive material; the Russians have refused those terms.

But another problem is that after years of effort, Western nations have not raised the approximately $2 billion that the Russians say they need to build and operate their conversion plant. The British said recently that they were withholding any pledge until the liability issue was resolved.

Posted by Jeff M at February 9, 2004 11:39 AM | TrackBack
Comments

I wonder if Pass the Gas will read this and have it go over his head as usual. This is PRECISELY what I mean when I have said that America and Russia has always had plans to dismantle their WMDs. They have dismantled a good portion in the past.

The dismantling of our WMDs has been in progress for quite sometime. It is absolutely foolish and absurd to suggest that because we 'still' possess WMDs we are just as guilty as nations that are seeking to produce them for the first time or to increase their stash.

Posted by: Jeff MacMillan at February 9, 2004 01:30 PM

Don't sweat it, Jeff. Either Pass is just too dumb to see the difference between a gun in the hands of a trained policeman, subject to multi-level oversight, enforcing laws ordained by an elected body and the same gun in the hands of drunk ex-con who's babe just dumped him, or else he's just pressing your buttons trying to waste your time.

Either-or, win-win.

BTW, I'd be interested in any tech details on the intended Pu reduction process if you have them.

Posted by: jeffers at February 9, 2004 08:58 PM

http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/News/120898text.html

This is rather old, and not too technical, but answers some of the questions regarding Pu weapons grade destruction.
More technical details by searching Los Alamos National Laboratory website.

Posted by: cincinnatus at February 10, 2004 02:52 AM

Thanks, Cincinnatus. I was hoping they'd figured out a way to make something useful out of it, like beer, but I guess I can settle for reactor fuel. Thanks for the link.

Posted by: jeffers at February 10, 2004 08:54 AM

Duh... I know what 2 do... duhh. Just sell so many kilos to da highest bidder on dah black market and use the proceeds to destroy dah rest. Ya, dat'll werk, duh ya!

Pass the Gas's Smarter Brother

Posted by: max darkside at February 10, 2004 08:45 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.


Remember me?