XPost: alt.war.nuclear   
   From: careysub@earthling.net   
      
    wrote in message   
   news:1144206901.585368.56450@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...   
   >I hate to say it, but I believe you are correct, i.e. this would be a   
   > test that would mimic a low yield nuke.   
   >   
   > When you look at the size of the AEC facility at Oakridge (k-25) and   
   > the power required to run the centrifuges, you have to wonder how big   
   > of an underground facility they have in  Iran. If you recall, they   
   > processes the nuclear weapons material at Oakridge to take advantage   
   > off all the power from the Tennessee Valley. Uranium enrichment takes a   
   > huge amount of energy.   
      
   Not really, not any more.   
      
   Since the days of the Manhattan Project the energy efficiency of uranium   
   enrichment has improved by as much as three orders of magnitude.   
      
   The really extravagant user of electricity at Oak Ridge was the   
   electromagnetic method, shut down in 1946 for this reason. Gaseous diffusion   
   was much more energy efficient even at that time, and improved by another   
   factor of 25 or so over the next 30 years as improved diffusion barriers   
   were developed.   
      
   Now with gas centrifuges the energy improvement over even advanced diffusion   
   plants is another 25 to 50 fold.   
      
   Currently advanced gas centrifuge energy consumption is in the range of   
   50-80 KWHr per SWU/kg. It takes 3500 SWU/kg to make one bomb from natural   
   uranium. This means as little as 175,000 KWHr per bomb, or less than 25   
   kilowatts continuously over a year. You can put a one megawatt gas turbine   
   power plant in a semi-trailer.  Even an much less efficient older centrifuge   
   will require only about 100 kilowatts continuously to produce a bomb a year.   
      
   Carey Sublette   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)