Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is an International Nuclear Fuelbank a Good Idea?

Posted by samzenpus on from the power-for-the-people dept.

An anonymous reader writes "A roundtable at the Bulletin of the Atomic Sciences explores the notion of nuclear fuel banks which would offer nations a guaranteed supply of low-enriched uranium if they renounce the right to enrich on their own. From the article: 'The basic idea behind an international fuel bank is that it would, in a reliable and nondiscriminatory way, make emergency supplies of market-priced low-enriched uranium available to states that sign up to participate. States that opt for membership in a fuel bank would gain increased confidence that their access to reactor-grade fuel would not be interrupted. In return, they would renounce the right to enrich uranium and reprocess spent fuel on their own. Such an arrangement could be appropriate for a number of states. But for others, it might be less than ideal.'"

6 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Energy Dependence is tricky at best by BMOC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What you would essentially be asking states to do is give up energy independence. It's a nice idea if you strongly trust every other nation in the world. The trouble is, even most allied nations these days harbor low-level suspicion of each other. That is to say nothing of all the ongoing conflicts and near-conflicts that exist. We're still living in a time of independent nation states that look after their own interests and try to avoid getting too pissed off at each other, so compulsory use of a central fuel repository is asking a lot of your average nation.

    --
    I swear they give me mod points to shut me up.
    1. Re:Energy Dependence is tricky at best by memnock · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also, I want to know how they're going to distribute in a "nondiscriminatory" way. The U.N. Security Council nations or NATO or the country/ies supplying the nuclear material are/is going to demand some kind of say in running the fuelbank. There is no way to guarantee there'll be no politics or bias in deciding who will get to fuel distributed to them.

      --
      "To stop the terrorists."
    2. Re:Energy Dependence is tricky at best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This program is basically designed for Iran. What they are trying to say that if Iran gives up their Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty rights for enrichment, then the US and Israel probably won't bomb them for that reason. And if the US or Israel needs to bomb Iran in the future, it can be done knowing that Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons or highly enriched uranium that they can give to their allies. Even better, if Iran starts misbehaving, this fuel can be sanctioned. Finally, if Iran doesn't accept this program, then they must be building nuclear bombs, which gives the US and Israel justification to start bombing.

    3. Re:Energy Dependence is tricky at best by shiftless · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This program is basically designed for Iran. What they are trying to say that if Iran gives up their Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty rights for enrichment, then the US and Israel probably won't bomb them for that reason. And if the US or Israel needs to bomb Iran in the future, it can be done knowing that Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons or highly enriched uranium that they can give to their allies. Even better, if Iran starts misbehaving, this fuel can be sanctioned. Finally, if Iran doesn't accept this program, then they must be building nuclear bombs, which gives the US and Israel justification to start bombing.

      You forgot to add, that's what the propaganda would like us to believe. Why would a sane nation give over its right to energy independence?

  2. Re:Won't work by icebike · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Those that sign up, will be at the mercy of the UN (useless nations), bank on it.

    Which is to say they will face no restrictions what so ever, and will be free to use the nuclear material for any purpose they want with no fear of anything but a stern "talking to".

    This probably amounts to a promise of refueling from the original reactor manufacturer, because most of these are one-off designs or made
    to specifications such that fuel rods can only be manufactured by one source. So realistically, you only have one country you have to remain
    on good terms with, and that is the country that supplied your reactor. Even if there was a fuel bank, they are not likely to be trusted with any
    significant amount of fuel, and would simply serve as an intermediary to process orders.
    So if you piss off the country that made your reactor the chances are you still would get no fuel, unless you could go to the UN and have
    them deliver a vicious tongue lashing to the country withholding the rods.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  3. Re:How about this instead... by Great+Big+Bird · · Score: 5, Informative

    Thorium can be used to produce U-233 which can be used to produce a simple bomb.