They could eventually spin it up, but would take longer than the months you first mention. Technical and material issues exist between yellow cake and weapons grade fissile material that the Ukrainian may not have access to (heavy water or plutonium). Even if they do, transforming their current civilian system would take several years optimistically.

Ultimately, that's my biggest issue is time. It's not months but years.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 18 points 11 hours ago

This. I wish the Democrats would take some responsibility for their choices. But they won't. Morons.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago

Voter turnout was the second highest since women got the right to vote. Voters came out and narrowly voted for Trump in seven key states. Many didn't like him, but didn't believe that the Dems actually cared about their issues. And while Trump is crass and wish he were nicer, at least life during his presidency wasn't bad for them.

This was the most important election in our life time and the best the Democrats could do was pick the next person in line.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 7 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Who cares, right? The meme suggests that people sat home this time. If they would have only come out, Harris would have won. But that's simply not true. Harris got more votes than Biden in 4 of the 7 swing states, about the same in 2 snd one is still being counted. Voter turnout out there was up as well. People didn't stay home where it mattered. Just more voted for Trump.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago

She out performed Buden in WI, GA, NV, and NC. She underperformed in PA and MI. AZ wasn't done counting when I got these numbers. Trump gained in all the rest.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 17 points 17 hours ago

People posting this type of stuff have to know that we have a an electoral college where swing states have a disproportionate influence on the outcome. Voter turnout was up in all of those states.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago

I don't know anything about the laws limiting transfer of fissile material and may violate issues with NATO membership. I'm not seeing the upside for Sweden to do any of this.

And from a quick search makes it sound like decommissioning of Ågestaverket began in 2020 and should be done in 2025. So the plant would need to be, essentially, rebuilt.

Next, the nuclear program was shut down in 1961 because they didn't have any Pu-240 to refine into Pu-247. Finally, when the program did exist, they had to get their heavy water from Norway. Heavy water allows them to use yellow cake directly for fissile material, but they still use light water but need an enrichment program. So, technically it's a long way still.

The out of touch political party. Is this not obvious at this point?

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

That was an interesting watch, but he doesn't put a clear timeline on how long it would take. I found this article that notes that:

The Prydniprovsky Chemical Plant in the city of Kamianske in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast processed uranium ore for the Soviet nuclear program, preparing yellowcake, an intermediate step in the processing of uranium ore.

It goes on to interview a couple of engineer about what they could be expected to produce, by when, and with what level of discresion:

Robert Kelley, an engineer with over 35 years of experience in the U.S. Department of Energy's nuclear weapons complex, said that it would be possible for Ukraine to create a primitive uranium fission bomb within five years.

"It's a fairly simple thing to do in the 21st century," he told the Kyiv Independent.

It would be much more difficult for Ukraine to build a plutonium fission bomb, and it would be harder to hide, Kelley argued. It would take five to 10 years to build a plutonium reactor, he added.

In contrast with a fission bomb, a "hydrogen bomb would be incredibly complicated," Kelley said. "No way in the world would (Ukraine) be able to create it," he added.

Kelley also said that Ukraine might be able to create a crude nucleardevice without assistance from other countries. For a more complex nuclear weapon, it would have to buy technology abroad, he added.

A Russian nuclear expert and a Ukrainian nuclear expert both confirmed to the Kyiv Independent that Ukraine is capable of producing a nuclear bomb, adding that it would likely take years. The Russian expert was speaking on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals, and the Ukrainian expert was not authorized to talk to the press about the issue.

"Ukraine would certainly have the knowhow and resources to become a nuclear weapons state if it made the political decision to do so," Lavikainen said. "The technology required is not out of reach for many countries, and certainly not for Ukraine since it housed crucial elements of the Soviet nuclear weapons complex when it was still part of the USSR."

"Ukraine could develop both nuclear warheads and carrier vehicles since it possesses the necessary military industry, uranium deposits, and nuclearenergy sector," Lavikainen continued.

Nikolai Sokov, a senior fellow at the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, was more cautious, saying that creating a nuclear bomb "is not impossible" for Ukraine. But, it "will take years, a lot of money, and most likely external support, at least on the equipment side."

"Ukraine does not have the industrial capacity to manufacture and maintain a nuclear arsenal; it does not have fissile materials, enrichment capacity, plutonium production, most of the elements that go into a nuclear weapon capability," he added.

Liviu Horovitz, a nuclear deterrence specialist at theGerman Institute for International and Security Affairs, also said that Ukraine faces challenges if it decides to create a nuclear bomb.

"Ukraine surely has the scientific prerequisites for a nuclear weapons program," but "acquiring the necessary fissile materials is neither cheap nor fast nor very easy to do in secret," he added.

The nuclear weapons expert who spoke on condition of anonymity said that the most primitive nuclear bomb program focused on uranium centrifuges could cost around $100 million. A plutonium bomb program would cost around $1 billion, he added.

It's all about that flux capacitor.

Everyone in this thread is talking like they could. Even if the country wasn't mired in a war of attrition, the process of building it takes time, expertise, money, and materials. They only have some of those. And not any money.

182

Act now and you too can see as well as a bat!

0
83
0
31

You're only 78 years old Little Squirt!

275
0
1
1
1
1
1
view more: next ›

TempermentalAnomaly

joined 1 year ago