pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 8 replies \ @Undisciplined 13h \ parent \ on: U.S. Enters War With Iran, Striking Fordo Nuclear Site: Live Updates Politics_And_Law
Yes, they've been open about enriching uranium for energy and medical purposes. That's not justification for anything.
By my understanding, they were complying with inspections while the Iran Deal was in place and have always been open to resuming those.
Stop falling for every dumb piece of war propaganda.
Neither medical nor energy purposes need 60% enriched uranium. Certainly not 83%
Stop falling for dumb Iranian propaganda.
reply
Naval reactors do use that level of enrichment, unlike nuclear weapons.
reply
reply
The reference I found said at least 50%, but I'm certainly no expert on this.
Is that number universal or are there models that use higher levels?
reply
I can double check at work tomorrow because yes they use highly enriched but they also have next to nothing amount wise as a result....
The AUKUS submarines that the US is going to export to Australia is supposed to be at 93-97% HOWEVER we dont actually have anything that functions with levels that high at the moment. We do not have the materials science to handle that. It is only going to have a spoonful of fuel.... which I mean is great and all but again goes to show that we are expecting this technology to make some huge strides.
There is a reason SMRs on land are not mainstream and out and about because its hard to build and maintain.
reply
Since we were talking about the range of enrichment roughly between 60% and 85% (weapons grade), I tried to look into what uses it has and the only one I saw was nuclear subs.
Iran doesn't have nuclear powered submarines and isn't building any; it would be perfectly reasonable to ensure they don't get any even if they tried.
reply
Your view of what's reasonable is very different from mine. Mine doesn't involve trying to police the actions of everyone on Earth.
reply