View Single Post
Old 2008-11-13, 15:41   Link #61
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
One of the issues that's likely to become only more pressing with time is that of who is allowed to possess nuclear technology. Sanctions are levied by the international community (most, if not all, of whom already possess nuclear technology) against other countries attempting to obtain nuclear technology, regardless of the reason that nuclear technology is desired.

The primary argument against nuclear proliferation is over the fear that nuclear technology will find its way into weapons. Nuclear weaponry is more destructive than conventional ballistic weaponry, and the potential destruction that could be caused is immense. In order to prevent nations deemed unstable or untrustworthy from acquiring nuclear technology, the international community imposes sanctions against those who seek it and attempts to lightly subsidize the needs of those who do not attempt to acquire it.
One of the underlying premises behind the Nonproliferation Treaty is that the reward for a country to not research nuclear weapons is that the nuclear powers will help them to develop nuclear technology for energy production. But the creaks and cracks in the treaty are apparent in the nuclear hotspots around the world.

This is an especially pressing problem since nuclear energy appears to be the only long-term energy alternative out there unless there are some radical changes in the way people live. It's probably going to be inevitable that much of the world will go in the direction of nuclear energy, so the best thing to do is to make it as safe and as sustainable as possible. There are lots of promising ideas in this field and the biggest obstacles are in terms of politics (both international and local).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tri-ring View Post
It's ALOT easier to make a "dirty"bomb than a thermo nuclear device and you don't even need weapon grade Uranium nor Plutonium to create a dirty bomb.
Just obtain high energy reactor waste, and a pestle to achieve maximum toxicity.
You don't even need to blow anything up, just pour it in to the water system and/or have the powder carried by wind.

Terroists somehow developing a termo nuclear bomb by obtaining raw ingredients is complete rubbish.
Dirty bombs are also nowhere nearly as destructive as some sources would like to suggest. Most of the evidence would seem to indicate that it's not really any more dangerous than a regular fragmentation bomb.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aoie_Emesai View Post
Nuclear waste is just as dangerous as nuclear bombs, but no one thinks like that because you never hear the term "nuclear waste and terrorist coined together" it's always "terrorist" "bomb" "nuclear."
On the contrary, the toxicity of nuclear waste is vastly overblown. The most dangerous nuclear material has a very short half-life and it'd normally have to be ingested to be fatal. The less radioactive material is only lethal if one is under prolonged exposure to it. What gets people up in arms is the threat of a chronic exposure to relatively small amounts of radiation, but that's generally about the same level of threat as a chemical spill and the like.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yezhanquan View Post
Ah, nuclear waste. How do you dispose of the stuff? I don't know about you, but some landfill has to accept this stuff. Oh, and pray that it doesn't contaminate the groundwater.
The best way to deal with nuclear waste is to reprocess it. Reprocessing will not only reduce the total amount of waste but it can also generate the most amount of energy from the raw materials possible. Unfortunately, reprocessing technology can also create weapon-grade material so it's an extremely sensitive technology to give to non-nuclear powers.

And as Mumitroll pointed out, nuclear waste isn't anywhere nearly as difficult to dispose of as it's popularly depicted. The procedures that can take care of other (and usually much more volumous) toxic chemicals can deal with nuclear waste. It's just that the latter have much worse press.


While the discussion about Isreal and geopolitics and so forth is pretty interesting, I think that it's outside of the scope for this thread, which was to discuss the potentials and dangers of nuclear power, not nuclear weapons. I suggest that you take it to PMs or a different thread.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote