ERRORS in rebuttal to "Pandora's Promise"

[PamW]

18. It's STILL an ERROR

caraher points out
Some of your gripes with the piece are inappropriately pendantic given its purpose, which is not to teach nuclear physics but to discuss nuclear power in light of the film. So when Hertsgaard says "fission produces plutonium," you have to use an obstinately literal interpretation to generate your ERROR!. As you yourself demonstrate, any fission reactor with U-238 in its fuel rods will produce plutonium, which only supports the main purpose of the sentence

caraher,

It's STILL an ERROR. Hertzgaard states that it is an "inalterable physical fact... That's WRONG!.

It's NOT "inalterable". As I point out, the thorium-uranium fuel cycle produces NO plutonium.

Additionally, Hertzgaard made this statement with regard to a particular reactor, the Integral Fast Reactor or IFR.

Although the IFR does produce plutionium, the IFR was specifically designed so that the mixture of plutonium isotopes that the IFR produces can NOT serve as nuclear bomb fuel. If you read the Frontline interview with Dr. Till of Argonne; he makes that clear to the interviewer, Richard Rhodes. Additionally, in this thread, I cite the report the Lawrence Livermore made on the IFR.

A bit more on that report in regard to Mr. Kerry. The report was requested by Congress which wanted to know if the IFR constituted a proliferation risk. The determination by weapons experts / designers at Lawrence Livermore was that it was IMPOSSIBLE to make a bomb from IFR plutonium. One of my colleagues went to Washington to brief the Congress on the contents of the report. This colleague addressed then Senator Kerry face to face in a briefing and told then Senator Kerry that the IFR was NOT a proliferation risk. Senator Kerry then went on the Senate floor, and said the exact opposite. What else could it be beside a BOLD-FACED LIE?.

Liquid sodium ONLY reacts with certain materials ( water being the principle example ). All one has to do is be sure that the liquid sodium is ISOLATED from materials with which it could react. For example, I visited the IFR prototype in Idaho. The liquid sodium reactor coolant was in one building; and NO water or other material that the sodium could react with was allowed in that building.

The plant was connected to a Rankine steam cycle to produce electric power; which meant water; but that was in a completely different building some distance away. That reactor operated for over 3 decades without a single sodium mishap. I think that is an important fact to bring to the discussion.

I don't like it when Democrats LIE; especially about scientific FACTS. I think it is important that one polices one's own side. Who should be the ones that keep our Democratic statesmen on the "straight and narrow" and not LYING their backsides off!! The people who need to police them, and call them out when they LIE are other Democrats.

It's hypocritical to allow our own side to LIE and then reap the results that accrue to our benefit. NOPE - I believe in playing the game honestly. How can one call out the Republicans for their LIES if Democrats are doing the same thing. You either play the game honestly; or you are a HYPOCRITE.

You get disappointed when journalists LIE or report erroneously. Stay tuned; when you see enough of it; your disappointment will turn into expectation.

PamW