Iran and The Bomb

[Lissa]

The Bushehr reactor (which Russia assisted Iran in putting up) is exempted from some IAEA limitations. The article below suggests that this exception, doubtless endorsed by UNSC member Russia, is a viable path toward a weaponized atomic weapon (plutnium it seems) in Iran in the short term, not the 3-5 year term.

Is this reporter crying wolf? Is the UNSC once again having trouble with consensus due to inter party agenda mongering? Mr Stephens is somehow privy to a confidential document, which raises the question of his article: How does he know, and who leaked this to him?
From WSJ.com
Wall Street Journal October 31, 2006
Giving Iran The Bomb By Bret Stephens

Once Iran has the bomb, what happens to balance of power in the Persian Gulf? Note the use of the words "material breach" regarding a WMD, exactly the same words use vis a vis Saddam.

Occhi

I would have to go back and look at some of my notes and books from when I got my degree. I can give you a better idea if he's blowing smoke or not if I can find more information on the Bushehr site. The amount of usable Plutonium that would come out of the reactor would depend on the power of the reactor, the more effective power it has (and I'm talking Thermal power, not Electrical power), and thus higher neutron flux within the core, will increase the amount of Uranium 238 converted to Plutonium 239. Also, it would depend on if the reactor is similar to the Chernobyl reactors. (Most people don't realize it, but the Chernobyl reactors were of a design that could be refueled while operating, thus allowing fuel rods that had been in the neutron flux long enough to convert Uranium 238 to Uranium 239 without said Uranium 239 being fissioned.) If the design of Bushehr is that of a converter style reactor, it is a big deal, if it is instead a burner style reactor (normal civilian eletrical producer) it would be less of a worry (but still a worry).

Let me get some research in and I can answer this better.

Begin edit as I don't want to produce another post:

Ok, I've read over the Bushehr reactor design by the Russias, this is not a Chernobyl style reactor, this is more like the GE and Westinghouse designs which make refueling much more difficult. The Iranians cannot easily remove fuel rods from the reactor except during a true downtime for refueling. Since it would take weeks to remove the fuel rods (powering down the reactor, allowing the fuel to cool down to thermal levels based on decay, lowering pressure inside the thermal loop, removal of the reactor cap, removal of the fuel bundles) and with the agreement in place that the spent fuel must be returned to Russia, I don't see this as a viable option for Iran. From what I was able to read pretty quickly, anytime there is a refueling cycle there will be Russia engineers on site to make sure that the fuel is removed, put into transport casks, and sent back to Russia for processing, this makes it more difficult for the Iranians to sneak some fuel off for reprocessing. If the Iranians were to substitute fresh fuel into the spent fuel, the Russians would find the ruse very quickly.

So, in effect for the Iranians to use Bushehr to create nuclear weapons the Russians would have to be incolusion with them to give them the bomb which might hurt them (the Russians) far more than they're willing to get hard cash from the Iranians (Russia gets large amounts of hard currency from selling their natural resources that are slowly becoming available with the advent of western technologies, giving Iran the bomb would be akin to destroying your own gravy train and I don't see the Russians being that stupid).