You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer
supported by the Administrators.
Visit
The New DU.
Reply #4: Which would only make sense for a weapon.
[View All]
Statistical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-10 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Which would only make sense for a weapon. |
|
Seawater extraction is currently 500% that of mined uranium.
Iran could purchase already processed, refined, enriched, and fabricated fuel ready for a reactor for a fraction of what just obtaining uranium from seawater would require.
Of course doing a fuel swap would mean Iran couldn't covertly build nuclear weapons.
|
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.