U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-07-2011, 02:37 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
7,084 posts, read 11,660,310 times
Reputation: 4125

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTOlover View Post
you aare correct it can be used as fuel in a reactor but cannot be made into weapons grade so Uranium is only useful as fuel rods in fact Canada has The Bruce nuclear power station contains eight CANDU nuclear reactor units. With all units in service the station has a net output of over 6,200 MW of electricity, which places it as the second largest nuclear complex in the world.

The name CANDU is a reference to the reactors' use of deuterium-oxide (heavy water) as the moderator and coolant, and uranium as fuel. This is a particularly effective solution for Canada’s power needs, as the country is the world's largest producer of uranium. The power reactors in Canada are currently all of the CANDU type, and the reactor is also marketed around the world.

which is funny because we are a non-nuclear armed country and sell uranium fuel rod bundles because they cannot be made into weapons grade and are only useful as fuel for power production
The reactor doesn't use depleted Uranium. The reactors use Uranium that has about 2x the amount of 238 as depleted uranium, it's not plied with other metals like the rounds, and it's surrounded by tritium (which is radioactive and adds neutrons as well).

I'm not saying I like DU, I think it's more chemically dangerous (it is a heavy metal) then radioactively, but lying about it doesn't help anyone. It certainly isn't a fission weapon as stated in the article.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-07-2011, 02:56 PM
 
44,764 posts, read 23,381,769 times
Reputation: 27241
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound View Post
The reactor doesn't use depleted Uranium. The reactors use Uranium that has about 2x the amount of 238 as depleted uranium...
You probably meant to say 235 there? (Not trying to pick nits, it's just that there's enough confusion.)

Quote:
I'm not saying I like DU, I think it's more chemically dangerous (it is a heavy metal)...
It's definitely toxic, but so is lead. It's a battlefield we're talking about. Unexploded ordnance is going to be much more of a worry than DU.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 03:11 PM
 
72,072 posts, read 54,047,753 times
Reputation: 44682
DU munitions pose nil radioactive threat. There is indeed a danger of heavy metal poisoning in the immediate area of use.

I personally think Gulf Syndrome is more likely related to the millions or billions of metric tons of cancerous etc. particulants from burning oil wells that went into the air in the region vs. the amounts of DU (used in somewhat specific areas)

Pull up a sattellite view of Iraq when there were hundreds of wells blazing for months.

The article appears to have been written by someone that took a lot of womens studies and philosophy classes and once set their low fat latte down on their roomates chemistry book.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 03:12 PM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,382,891 times
Reputation: 4453
you can argue back and forth over what it is, but none of you would want it used on you.

war is a nasty business -some people get rich off of it and some people die.

i see that our useless congress has just voted not to defund the libyan action (or whatever name they want to call it now):

A broader bipartisan amendment from Reps. Amash (R – MI) and Kucinich (D – OH) narrowly failed, with a vote of, 199-229. That amendment would have barred the use of any funds for the war in any capacity. This vote was overwhelmingly opposed by Democrats, but saw a split among Republicans.

the democrats have, indeed, now gone all macho in libya. who would have thought they would be such good warmongers, after all of their war opposition speeches?

thank you mr kucinich for bucking the trend.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 03:13 PM
 
Location: USA - midwest
5,944 posts, read 5,399,023 times
Reputation: 2606
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
LOL...can't wait to see how the leftist droids who complained bitterly over the use of DU in Iraq and Afghanistan think it now is okay to use by their boy Obama in Libya....

Please post any sources you have that indicate US forces are deploying DU weapons in Libya.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 03:36 PM
 
22,925 posts, read 14,300,990 times
Reputation: 16962
My understanding, which could be erroneous, is the 20 and 30 mil stuff as was used by Tomcats gatlings in the Bosnia region and later in Iraq were DU rounds but I've not heard of any "dropped" munitions being tipped with DU.

Perhaps missions flown by copters with gatlings are using them in Libya but what other munitions being used there would have DU rounds?

Those who know the types of munitions fitted to F18 Hornets etc., would be better to answer this.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 03:54 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
7,084 posts, read 11,660,310 times
Reputation: 4125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
You probably meant to say 235 there? (Not trying to pick nits, it's just that there's enough confusion.)
Ah yeah, my bad there. Good catch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
It's definitely toxic, but so is lead. It's a battlefield we're talking about. Unexploded ordnance is going to be much more of a worry than DU.
So are a lot of things, the alternatives investigated so far to DU and lead are even more toxic. I would not want to halt it, but I think driving research towards alternatives that don't present a danger for people living long after a conflict is a pretty responsible thing to do.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 03:58 PM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,382,891 times
Reputation: 4453
i don't know if all of this is true but here are some interesting observations on depleted uranium:

Depleted Uranium

Many thousands of rounds of ammunition was fired in the Gulf War. Tank busting rounds were tipped with depleted uranium. A tip of depleted uranium packs a punch, high kinetic energy in technical jargon. An unexpected benefit, not only does it bust enemy tanks, it also gets rid of unwanted nuclear waste. On hitting a tank, or armoured vehicle, the force of impact causes the DU to vaporise, an aerosol of uranium dioxide and uranium trioxide is formed. The vehicle and the surrounding area becomes contaminated with radioactive depleted uranium dust. Clean up crews were given no warnings, issued with no protective clothing. Since the Gulf War, the US DoD has produced a video warning of the dangers of DU but few people have seen it.

Depleted uranium when alloyed with titanium forms a dense hard penetrator. The two together are pyrophoric, on impact they combust releasing an aerosol of fine uranium particles. 60% of the particles are less than 5 micron in diameter, 10 microns is a respirable size.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 04:01 PM
 
Location: On the Chesapeake
41,772 posts, read 54,465,050 times
Reputation: 56302
A-10's use DU. If Tomcats had DU rounds then F 18E/F models likely do also. They originally (the A variant) did not when it was introduced.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 04:06 PM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,568 posts, read 21,175,665 times
Reputation: 2518
Quote:
Originally Posted by wade52 View Post
Please post any sources you have that indicate US forces are deploying DU weapons in Libya.
A-10 Thunderbolts and AC-130's have been used.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

¬© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top