[extropy-chat] nuclear non-proliferation as energy strategy ?

user user at dhp.com
Tue Jan 17 16:23:40 UTC 2006

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Robert Bradbury wrote:

> Actually, as  the article recently cited by Samantha points out, signing the
> NPT gives nations the freedom to perform uranium enrichment for peaceful
> applications (such as as power production).  Iran has signed the treaty.
> Israel, India and Pakistan have not.  Iran at this point seems to have the
> designs and parts for the centrifuges required to perform uranium
> enrichment.  The problem comes down to the fact that it is a relatively
> small step from enriching uranium for generating electricity to producing
> highly enriched uranium for  nuclear weapons.
> Generally speaking until Iran runs out of oil it seems to make little
> economic sense for it to be building nuclear power reactors.

Yes, this is what has confused me.  So they have signed the treaty, and
they are attempting actions that fall within the treaty ...

So two things:

1. We are keeping nuclear energy development away from people we don't
like, regardless of whether they are playing by _our_ rules or not.

2. Is it really true that signatories can pursue modern nuclear power
generation ?  Can they develop modern pebble bed nukes, etc. ?  Or does
that fall outside of what is allowed.

Again, my previous analysis may not apply to Iran, but it sure looks like
we are trying to keep nuclear power generation (or at least modern forms
of it - see #2 above) out of peoples hands, regardless of the weapons

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list