Iran has produced 40 kg of 20% enriched uranium

[kristopher]

Iran has produced 40 kg of 20% enriched uranium
English.news.cn 2011-01-08 20:52:49

TEHRAN, Jan. 8 (Xinhua) -- Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) and acting Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi announced Saturday that the country has so far produced almost 40 kg of 20 percent enriched uranium to supply fuel to the Tehran research reactor, local semi-official Fars news agency reported.

"We have produced about 40 kg of 20 percent (enriched) uranium and we hope to witness the injection of the first batch of Iran- made 20 percent fuel to the Tehran research reactor soon," Fars quoted Salehi as saying.

Salehi also said that Tehran is preparing to resume talks with the Vienna Group (the U.S., Russia, France and the International Atomic Energy Agency) on the swap of nuclear fuel for the Tehran research reactor.

The more they (the Vienna Group) delay in holding a new round of negotiations with Iran, "the more progress we make in fuel production and after a while the issue of fuel swap will become meaningless," Salehi said.

Stressing that Iran is one of the few countries ...

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-01/08/c_13682042.htm

Over the next 50 years, unless patterns change dramatically, energy production and use will contribute to global warming through large-scale greenhouse gas emissions — hundreds of billions of tonnes of carbon in the form of carbon dioxide. Nuclear power could be one option for reducing carbon emissions. At present, however, this is unlikely: nuclear power faces stagnation and decline. ...

We did not analyze other options for reducing carbon emissions — renewable energy sources, carbon sequestration,and increased energy efficiency — and therefore reach no conclusions about priorities among these efforts and nuclear power. In our judgment, it would be a mistake to exclude any of these four options at this time.

STUDY FINDINGS
For a large expansion of nuclear power to succeed,four critical problems must be overcome:

Cost. In deregulated markets, nuclear power is not now cost competitive with coal and natural gas.However,plausible reductions by industry in capital cost,operation and maintenance costs, and construction time could reduce the gap. Carbon emission credits, if enacted by government, can give nuclear power a cost advantage.

Safety.
Modern reactor designs can achieve a very low risk of serious accidents, but “best practices”in construction and operation are essential.We know little about the safety of the overall fuel cycle,beyond reactor operation.

Waste.
Geological disposal is technically feasible but execution is yet to be demonstrated or certain. A convincing case has not been made that the long-term waste management benefits of advanced, closed fuel cycles involving reprocessing of spent fuel are outweighed by the short-term risks and costs. Improvement in the open,once through fuel cycle may offer waste management benefits as large as those claimed for the more expensive closed fuel cycles.

Proliferation.
The current international safeguards regime is inadequate to meet the security challenges of the expanded nuclear deployment contemplated in the global growth scenario. The reprocessing system now used in Europe, Japan, and Russia that involves separation and recycling of plutonium presents unwarranted proliferation risks.

This MIT study (The Future of Nuclear Power) is considered to be "definitive" by nuclear supporters.

web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/