Skip to main content

Charlie said...

Image
By
Charlie  Verdon assures us that pit production goals can be met:

https://www.aikenstandard.com/news/nnsa-weapons-expert-pushes-back-on-pit-production-uncertainty/article_c9bb3c40-2029-11ea-bc28-9f0530e70d92.html

Comments

Anonymous said…
Ironic since we literally built thousands of pits in a shorter period of time at lower cost using 1950s technology. Savannah River might be up to that task if Los Alamos people hold their hand and the DOE and DNSFB “experts” stay away.
12/27/2019 11:11 AM
Anonymous said…
"Ironic since we literally built thousands of pits in a shorter period of time at lower cost using 1950s technology.

12/27/2019 11:11 AM"

Things that have gotten demonstrably better with modern manufacturing technology:

V-8 Engines
Mobile Phones
Refrigerators
Submarines
Stealth fighters
.
.
.
Pits? How would you know? They can't be tested!
12/28/2019 10:43 AM
Anonymous said…
Pits that COULD be tested were plenty good enough.
12/29/2019 7:56 AM
Anonymous said…
We don’t need new pits, since aging is not an issue:

This is from the JASON report (https://fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/pit.pdf):

As a result of the Los Alamos/Livermore efforts, JASON concludes that there is no evidence from the UGT analyses for plutonium aging mechanisms affecting primary perfor- mance on timescales of a century or less in ways that would be detrimental to the enduring stockpile.

The need for new pits is largely a fabrication of LANL for the purpose of funding a make-work pit facility. This debate has been going on for years with LANL winning the argument in the face of contradictory scientific evidence.
12/29/2019 11:10 AM
Anonymous said…
Right now, pits are a non-renewable resource.
1/22/2020 5:36 PM
Anonymous said…
But not non-reusable, with a little modeling.
1/23/2020 5:31 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
79 comments
Read more