From: Emlyn O'regan (oregan.emlyn@healthsolve.com.au)
Date: Tue Aug 26 2003 - 18:59:00 MDT
Can we put that stuff into nuclear power plants and do something useful with
it?
Emlyn
Robert wrote:
> Just so you know the numbers (read em and weep (perhaps)).
>
> In terms of Enriched Uranium, the U.S. has 645 *tons*
> while Russia has 1,050 tons. In terms of plutonium
> (which can create smaller bombs), the U.S. has 100 tons
> while Russia has 160 tons. According to my calculations
> that translates into a potential for 194,000+ nuclear weapons.
>
> Please note that I am talking *tons*, while when one talks
> nuclear weapons sizes one talks the vicinity of dozens (or less)
> of "pounds" or "kg".
>
> The material is not allocated in a "maximal number of weapons"
> pattern. (e.g. minimal weapon yield per quantity of weapons class
> material -- so the probable number of weapons is lower due to
> the desire to produce weapons of greater destructive power).
> Also, much of the material is probably in storage as weapons are
> dismantled. But make no mistake -- we (the U.S. and the Russians)
> have significant capability to set humanity back for dozens to
> hundreds of years should "something" happen -- perhaps long
> enough to allow an asteroid or a gamma ray burst to wipe out
> humanity entirely.
>
> Robert
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 26 2003 - 19:58:09 MDT