Bugger, where did i put that Plutonium?
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bugger, where did i put that Plutonium?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4272691.stm
So 30KG is missing but then they say its just a paper loss WTF???
"it's not an indication of any missing material."
So does that mean they've still got it, they just dont know where it is?
Then they say
"There will always be some material unaccounted for"
Again, WTF? How can they think it's acceptable that there will always be some plutonium missing?
So 30KG is missing but then they say its just a paper loss WTF???
"it's not an indication of any missing material."
So does that mean they've still got it, they just dont know where it is?
Then they say
"There will always be some material unaccounted for"
Again, WTF? How can they think it's acceptable that there will always be some plutonium missing?
#4
Hello
I did wonder about that. If I mis-place a few pence in my budget I have people all over me so quite how they can get away with mislaying plutonium is beyond me.
As an idea of how much Plutonium is required to make a bomb:
From: http://www.terrorismanswers.org/weap...ing_print.html
Steve.
I did wonder about that. If I mis-place a few pence in my budget I have people all over me so quite how they can get away with mislaying plutonium is beyond me.
As an idea of how much Plutonium is required to make a bomb:
Plutonium would probably be less attractive to terrorists than uranium. Although far smaller quantities of it are necessary to build a bomb, plutonium does not occur naturally and must be synthesized in nuclear reactors. Plutonium is also harder to work with, extremely harmful to humans when inhaled, and tens of thousands of times more radioactive than uranium, presenting a far greater danger to the bomb designers who would have to shape and handle it. The original U.S. plutonium weapon, used on Nagasaki in 1945, used approximately 13 pounds of plutonium, and modern U.S. weapons require less.
Steve.
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The biosphere
Posts: 7,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading between the lines somewhat, I don't think this means they have dropped a 30kg lump of plutonium somewhere "Homer style" . Rather it means that they measure the amounts of plutonium coming into the plant and the depleated waste that comes out of the plant and try and match the two. The way I understand it this is limited in accuracy and the 30kg discrepancy has come about after hundreds of tonnes of throughput and spread across a lengthy period of time, so statistically it is insignificant and, apparently, well within specified limits set by the authorities.
Either that or pslewis nicked it!
Either that or pslewis nicked it!
#6
I did wonder about that. If I mis-place a few pence in my budget I have people all over me so quite how they can get away with mislaying plutonium is beyond me.
This is just typical of anything the government has any hand in....
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Belmondo
Me too. I've had to spend whole days looking for sums like 12 Hongkong cents and 4p on accounts that total tens of millions, just because someone thinks it looks untidy if you write it off .
This is just typical of anything the government has any hand in....
This is just typical of anything the government has any hand in....
The analogy is your bank melting down several tons of coins and using material to make a new coin. There will be a theoretically "correct" number of new coins minted but the end result is bound to be slightly out because of the process. DL.
On the other hand no one can be CERTAIN that the stuff hasn't gone missing!
Trending Topics
#8
Despite the huge tonnage involved, 60 kg of plutonium is a signifcant amount when you consider how many nukes you could produce from it.
It looks like a pretty lackadaisical system they use and bearing in mind the importance attached its about time they got it down to a much more accurate system.
Les
It looks like a pretty lackadaisical system they use and bearing in mind the importance attached its about time they got it down to a much more accurate system.
Les
#10
Scooby Regular
here we go again, typical media scare mongering. I'm sure the Tony brigade will launch a full enquiry at tax payers expense and we'll then feel nice and safe and vote them in for another term
Every industry that produces industrial waste has descrepencies between what's "physically" accounted for a what the paper chase says should be there.
If it did go "missing" (and it happens every year), just where are all these home-made nuclear bombs????
Are people so paranoid these days that they'll believe any old rubbish?
Every industry that produces industrial waste has descrepencies between what's "physically" accounted for a what the paper chase says should be there.
If it did go "missing" (and it happens every year), just where are all these home-made nuclear bombs????
Are people so paranoid these days that they'll believe any old rubbish?
#11
Didn't pslewis say in the hunting thread yesterday that he was going to be away for a few days....
edit:
edit:
Originally Posted by pslewis
I'm off for a few days now ........
Argue amongst yourselves!
Pete
Argue amongst yourselves!
Pete
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leslie
Despite the huge tonnage involved, 60 kg of plutonium ........Les
Do you know something we don't? It was 30 kgs last time I looked. Oh well what's a few nukes between friends?
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: From Kent to Gloucestershire to Berkshire
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd be worried if the only thing preventing plutonium leaving site is the inventory. However, it isn't even nearly the case. The monitoring procedure for anyone or anything going in and out of these sort of buildings will pick up stupidly small amounts of radioactive material. I've worked at power stations and seen major enquiries about invisibly small specs of contaminated steel or graphite, with much smaller total radioactivity than a jar of brazillian coffee. You would not get out carrying a milligram of plutonium without a lot of people knowing about it.
You do have to remember just how tightly regulated the UK nuclear industry is. Aforementioned jar of coffee would have to be packaged and processed as low level waste if it found it's way into certain bits of plant.
Unless anyone actually knows a lot more than is written in the report, we really aren't in a position to determine whether the system or operators need improvement. It wouldn't be the first instance of press sensationalism of something which is no different to any other industry but can grab headlines because of the word "nuclear".
You do have to remember just how tightly regulated the UK nuclear industry is. Aforementioned jar of coffee would have to be packaged and processed as low level waste if it found it's way into certain bits of plant.
Unless anyone actually knows a lot more than is written in the report, we really aren't in a position to determine whether the system or operators need improvement. It wouldn't be the first instance of press sensationalism of something which is no different to any other industry but can grab headlines because of the word "nuclear".
#20
Originally Posted by Neil Smalley
"I'm sure that in 1985 Plutonium is available from every corner store, but here in 1955 it's a bit more difficult to obtain..."
1.21 Gigawatts!!!
1.21 Gigawatts!!!
"You built a time machine out of a DeLorean!?!?"
"I figure if you're gonna build a time machine, do it with style!"
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post