Nuclear moon

Nasa is considering a nuclear reactor to power its proposed Moonbase.

Nice design, but since it only generates 40 kilowatts it won't be much use powering laser defence batteries, so i don't imagine that Shado will be very interested.

So Much For the Energy Crisis

Just how long will the world's uranium supply last? 50 years? 500?

Try 5 billion. That's "billion".

Demron

Radiation Shielding Technologies has come up with a material that protects as well as lead for one-seventh the thickness.

I really must dash off a note to my tailor.

Atomic Earth

Scientists suspect that the Earth's core is a giant nuclear reactor.

Greenpeace demands immediate shutdown of planet.

World's Largest Laser

Close... So close.

Um...

Taiwan asked the United States for helicopter batteries and got nuclear warhead triggers instead.

In what is in the running for understatement of the century, the no. 2 at the American Defense Department called this development, "disconcerting".

1957 All Over Again

According to the Guardian, Iran's "peaceful" space programme is keeping pace with its "peaceful" nuclear programme. No doubt to be followed by a "peaceful" targeting programme and "peaceful" MIRV programme.

It's amazing how the Guardian's correspondent could spill so much ink on Tehran's ambitions to put a satellite into orbit without noting that the difference between an orbital booster and an ICBM is simply a matter of intent.

Iran to Build 19 Atomic Reactors

Iran declares that not only will it never stop its uranium enrichment programme, but it plans to build 19 nuclear reactors.

Who are you going to believe; the NIE or your lying eyes?

Micro Nuclear Reactors

Toshiba announces that it is marketing micro nuclear reactors.

I'm definitely altering my plans to install a propane generator at Chez Szondy.

How to Arm A Nuclear Bomb

A bit of post-Cold War retroactive nervousness from the BBC.

At least they let the MOD get a word in on the subject. Translated into English, what they're saying is that decoding the "go" message and launching a Trident is so complex that you'd need a conspiracy by pretty much the entire boat to pull it off.

Ford Nucleon

Damn Interesting has a rather nifty article on the Ford Nucleon: Atomic runabout for the atomic age.

Davy Crockett

And now we present the smallest nuclear weapon ever fielded by the US Army: The Davy Crockett tactical nuclear system.

It had a range of only three miles, so it wasn't so much fire-and-forget as fire-and-run-like-the-clappers.

If You Want Peace, Prepare for War

From the Telegraph:

The world should "prepare for war" with Iran, the French foreign minister has said, significantly escalating tensions over the country's nuclear programme.

Bernard Kouchner said that while "we must negotiate right to the end" with Iran, if Teheran possessed an atomic weapon it would represent "a real danger for the whole world".

The world should "prepare for the worst... which is war", he said.

At last we know where David Cameron shipped all those Conservative party spines.

Nuclear Swings and Roundabouts

Remember, an enemy is just a misunderstood friend.

The good news: North Korea agrees to end its nuclear weapons programme.

The bad news: The same load of IAEA dimwits who allowed Dear Leader to get his first batch of bombs is monitoring the deal.

Sleep tight, everyone.

Hard Choices Now or Impossible Choices Tomorrow

A rundown of the last few days:

• The IAEA, the nuclear inspection agency with a learning curve as flat as Kansas, declared on Thursday that Iran is "cooperating" to "resolve outstanding issues."
• Today, Iran demonstrated that its idea of "cooperation" is to bring another 3000 centrifuges on line.
• Meanwhile, the Pentagon shows more realism and draws up plans for a three-day blitz that will take out Iran's entire military infrastructure in case the Mullah's get too close to lighting the blue touch-paper.

Every day I feel more like I'm living through a repeat of the late '30s with the IAEA playing the part of the umbrella. The words "Rhineland 1936" in two-foot letters should be tacked up on the wall of every Western leader.

Uranium? What Uranium?

International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors
discuss the Libyan uranium problem.

Less than a month after French President Sarkosy said that Colonel Gaddafi could be trusted with nuclear reactors, we discover that Libya has still to surrender 200 barrels of uranium as per its 2003 agreement to abandon its nuclear weapons programme in return for the West lifting sanctions.

Of absolutely no surprise to anyone, the handover of uranium was the responsibility of the IAEA, who never met an illicit nuclear weapons programme in the hands of a would-be Bond villain that it couldn't completely fail to do anything about.

Evening the Odds

Leave it to the French to bend logic until it breaks as President Sarkosy explains why his country is helping Libya to build nuclear power plants.

"Nuclear power is the energy of the future," he said. "If we don't give the energy of the future to the countries of the southern Mediterranean, how will they develop themselves? And if they don't develop, how will we fight terrorism and fanaticism?"

The president added that if the West considered that Arab countries were "not sensible enough to use civilian nuclear power", this would risk a "war of civilizations".

Aside from the fact that Libya already has plenty of oil to produce power, that Colonel Gaddafi is as flaky as a box of corn flakes, and that he has a track record of trying to get his hands on WMDs, if there is even the remotest chance of a "war or civilisations" wouldn't be prudent to forget appeasing our enemies in favour of making certain that they be kept as far from getting nuclear weapons as possible?

But then France wouldn't have anyone to surrender to.

I Don't Think That Word Means What You Think It Means

From the BBC:

The EU's foreign policy chief has described as "constructive" talks with Iran's top nuclear negotiator.

That's "constructive" as in "we've given Iran all the time it needs to build a bomb and haven't made them pay any price for such insanity whatsoever."

Talking to Death

Iran now has enough nuclear material (that we know of) to construct two fission bombs.

Looks like all that talking did the job-- for the Mullahs.

Axis of Evil? What Axis?

North Korea tested its new 3000-mile range Musudan missile-- in Iran.

Nothing to see here, folks. Move along.

Quote of the Day

From the Telegraph:

If the choice is them continuing [towards a nuclear bomb] or the use of force, I think you're at a Hitler marching into the Rhineland point. If you don't stop it then, the future is in his hands, not in your hands, just as the future decisions on their nuclear programme would be in Iran's hands, not ours.

John Bolton on Iran's nuclear weapons power programme.

UN Slides Into Irrelevance

Sweet spirits of nitre, you can't make this stuff up! The UN has shown that is is utterly useless with this interesting little development (emphasis added):

On April 9, 2007 there was a United Nations believe-it-or-not moment extraordinaire. At the same time that Iran’s President Ahmadinejad declared his country was now capable of industrial-scale uranium enrichment, the U.N. reelected Iran as a vice chairman of the U.N. Disarmament Commission.

Next up, Tony Soprano is put in charge of stamping out the Mafia.

Priorities II

Meanwhile, Iran demonstrates that it can focus on more than just humiliating the Royal Navy as it announces that it has brought 3,000 uranium gas enrichment centrifuges on line at the Natanz plant and can now enrich nuclear fuel on a weapons "industrial" scale.

Something tells me that if we don't do something soon, we're going to be getting a lot more from Tehran than goody bags.

Britannia Keeps her Trident

In a burst of sanity, the House of Commons voted to replace the Trident nuclear deterrent when it reaches its service limit in 2020.

The press has made a meal of the backbench rebellion against the government and fostered the impression that if the vote passed, it would barely squeak through, which it did-- if a landslide victory of 409 to 161 can be called a "squeak".

Whither Trident?

The question of whether Britain will replace the Trident nuclear deterrent has been complicated the question of whether Britain can replace it.

Close, But No Cigar

Still hanging around in Iran, the Guardian has an article on John Curtis of the British Museum, who is worried about a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities because they are "perilously close" to many archaeological sites.

How close? Well, let's take Persepolis, which Dr. Curtis points out is "within 50 miles of the Ardakan and Fasa uranium processing plants".

Fifty miles? That's practically around the corner-- or would be if the Coalition didn't have precision munitions that can fly through an outhouse window at 600 miles range or warheads that can take out one room in a building and leave the rest intact. Still, it is curious that Dr. Curtis is so concerned about the prospect of an attack on Iran's nuclear weapons sites, yet he is not about who put those military targets near archaeological treasures in violation of the Geneva Conventions in the first place.

Or, perhaps, it isn't too curious, as Dr. Curtis doesn't seem bothered at all by the prospect of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, New York, or even London with the British Museum with all its treasures being targeted with nuclear weapons by a regime that for 27 years has used "death to Israel, death to Britain, death to America" the way other people use "have a nice day."

That, apparently, is not a problem.

A Slight Oversight

The BBC ran a feature on how a military strike against Iran's nuclear weapons programme would cause Iran to get the bomb sooner rather than later by not destroying all of Iran's facilities, providing the regime with increased political support, and fostering a determination to pursue a "crash" programme.

Never mind that Tehran is a dictatorship where domestic support is irrelevant, that it's a bit difficult to make a crash programme crashier, or that knocking out key parts of a nuclear programme (such as the tyrants running the country) can be as effective as taking out the whole sheebang; what I found interesting was the prominence the BBC gave to the views of Dr. Frank Barnaby, who the Beeb describes as "a respected British nuclear weapons scientist", though neglecting to mention that he hasn't worked in the field in nearly fifty years or that he's on the staff of the CND-ish, anti-war Oxford Research Group. In fact, the ORG isn't even obliquely mentioned until paragraph 23. Not exactly thorough reporting there.

The BBC includes this interesting history lesson regarding strikes against rogue nuclear states:

The US has examined the possibility of military strikes on other countries' nuclear facilities in the past.

It came closest in 1994, when a White House meeting discussing whether to strike North Korea was interrupted by news of a possible deal over the country's nuclear programme.

The option of military strikes against Pakistan's Kahuta plant were also examined in the late 1970s but ruled out because the chances of success were rated too low when compared to the consequences of going ahead.

But there is one important precedent for an attack on nuclear facilities.

In June 1981, eight Israeli fighter jets took only 90 seconds to destroy Iraq's Osirak reactor in an audacious bombing raid. It is sometimes cited as a precedent for a US or Israeli (or joint) attack on Iran, but is it really a useful parallel?

One would think so. Not surprisingly, the BBC asserts that the strike against Iraq produced a bizarre, yet unproven, boost to the Saddam's nuclear programme, which was suddenly dismantled for some reason in 1991 that the BBC seems reluctant to explore (*cough* Gulf War *cough*). Neither do they seem very interested in the outcome of the three episodes:

• No strike against North Korea: North Korea gets the bomb.
• No strike against Pakistan: Pakistan gets the bomb.
• Strike against Iraq: No Iraqi bomb.

Pace, BBC et al, I think I see a pattern here.

Nuclear Deal?

The Six-Nations Talks claims to have made a breakthrough with North Korea agreeing to shut down its main nuclear reactor in exchange for fuel aid.

This is being hailed in the press as a major development, but we've been down this path too many times for me to get too excited. For my part, I'm holding off on the champagne until the US Seventh Fleet is anchored offshore from Pyongyang with all weapons armed to take possession of all North Korean nuclear materials and enrichment machinery.

Let me put it this way, the bottle isn't even in the fridge yet.

Voice of the Cuckoo

Jacques Chirac gave an interview the other day where he dropped this brick about a nuclear-armed Iran,

I would say that what is dangerous about this situation is not the fact of having a nuclear bomb - having one, maybe a second one a little later, well, that's not very dangerous.

Where will it drop it, this bomb? On Israel? It would not have gone 200 metres into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed.

Of course, he realised what a clanger he'd made and retracted his remarks within 24 hours-- but only the bit about Tehran being razed. Apparently the imams can sleep safely with Chirac at the helm of the Force de Frappe, though no one else will.

Some people suggest that the reporters present should have asked M. Chirac if he was smoking crack. I reject that as ridiculous. The proper question is how much he's been smoking.

Storm Cloud

The Telegraph reports that North Korea is helping Iran with nuclear weapons testing.

Axis? What Axis?

And Now We Are Three

Good News: New Labour plans to keep the nuclear detterent force. Bad news: It's going to be with three submarines instead of four with only 150 warheads.

To paraphrase Bilbo Baggins, it's a bit thin, like butter spread over too much bread.