Every single NPP that is not based on fast neutron reactors (all western ones) running on rods with any U238 content (all currently used rods) could produce nuclear weapon material - plutonium-239.
Nuclear weapon material is mostly Pu239 that created in rods as they work in reactor.
The main problem with Pu239 is not creating it, but separation from the depleted NPP fuel. AFAIK, Finland have no abilities to extract plutonium from depleted NPP fuel.
So, every country that have NPP produce nuclear weapon material. But very few have an ability to extract and enrich it. Finland is not in that list, so it could produce only a raw material on any of its NPP that have to be processed to get nuclear weapons material in one of more advanced country with sufficient nuclear weapons material processing power like USA, Russia, France or China.
Last couple of days people in social medias have been talking about Finland's plans to host NATO's nuclear weapons and now in latest episode of leveli the hosts interview a nuclear expert who says that Olkiluoto 3 was created to produce nuclear weapon material.
What do you think? Could it be that Finland is planning not only to host NATO's nuclear weapons but they also plan to produce their own nuclear weapons? After all, Finland has been wanting to acquire nuclear weapons since 1958.
They've been building that thing for like 20 years now, and it still doesn't work.
Hiring French & Russians to produce it using 3rd world workforce was a mistake. A lot of delays came when they couldn't follow Finnish safety requirements.
Nuclear power is such a hustle. They're shilling it hard right now too.
It's only safe & clean sustainable energy. Wind power & solar power are scams.
Coal is dirty as shit. Not only from mining it, but since it contains trace amounts of thorium and uranium, those get released into the air from burning it. Unless you’re going to refine the coal into a clean fuel, or make some giant water bong style filters for the smoke stacks, coal is worse than nuclear and also a finite resource. Once coal is all gone it’s gone, no more gets made unless we wipe out the world and it starts over from scratch. In which case we’re still like 300-450 million years away from having new coal.
Indeed we can make charcoal but charcoal isn’t coal. Switching to a wood based heat system IS doable, with proper forest management and logging, but coal itself it finite. It was generated millions of years ago before bacteria that breaks down and rots the tree down evolved. Trees died and fell and got compacted and nothing broke them down and the pressure and maybe some heat(I wasn’t there at the time, lol) changed the ancient cellulose strands from the wood we know and love into coal.
I’d much rather see nuclear be used in the near future and save coal for later on. Maybe we invent a process that makes it a super battery, maybe we find a combination that results in a super fuel. We won’t be able to do that if we simply burn it all when there’s better options.
Yes. However charcoal is almost as good, better in some regards, better extraction, except needs far more to be efficient. It is renewable not finite. No, we aren't running out of coal. Not yet in any event.
Nuclear isn't effective when it comes to furnaces. Redundant in fact. Smelting, concrete, metals, steel, glass. Gas is by far and wide a better means. However it is also costly. Electricity requires far more parts, far more power. Making furnace, like turning on kettle, huge drain.
Power generation yes nuclear is without equals, it delivers far more output effectively.
But it's a narrative. A narrative of using non carbon based power sources. Absurdly in many regards. We are on a carbon planet and it has recycled that fuel already. Humans just charge more for their bullshit. Stop man making fire by charging them for electricity. Smells like a bigger con. Look at the price. They still burn it anyway. But the emissions, yes more of them shit everywhere. They aren't clean if they're invasive, computer don't grow on trees.
Seems to me like any nuclear facility can masquerade as a power plant or weapons plant. They can do both. The byproduct of nuclear power plants is stuff like depleted uranium which is used in ammunition.
Most depleted uranium arises as a by-product of the production of enriched uranium for use as fuel in nuclear reactors and in the manufacture of nuclear weapons.
Think about the implications...
Your enemy has a nuclear power plant. You want to destroy it. That will cut off power to thousands of civilians. What do you do? Convince your nation in the media that it's a nuclear weapons plant. (Similar to Iran and the Stuxnet virus that destroyed their facility)
Or consider the situation in reverse. You have a nuclear weapons plant at the border of Russia. You claim its a power plant.
Pretty convenient to have this kind of advanced facility that "maybe kills people" or "maybe keeps people alive". And with this gray area, a sheepish public is easy to manipulate in regards to environmental protection, nuclear waste, war, etc. The Schrodinger's cat of facilities.
Every single NPP that is not based on fast neutron reactors (all western ones) running on rods with any U238 content (all currently used rods) could produce nuclear weapon material - plutonium-239.
Nuclear weapon material is mostly Pu239 that created in rods as they work in reactor.
The main problem with Pu239 is not creating it, but separation from the depleted NPP fuel. AFAIK, Finland have no abilities to extract plutonium from depleted NPP fuel.
So, every country that have NPP produce nuclear weapon material. But very few have an ability to extract and enrich it. Finland is not in that list, so it could produce only a raw material on any of its NPP that have to be processed to get nuclear weapons material in one of more advanced country with sufficient nuclear weapons material processing power like USA, Russia, France or China.
Last couple of days people in social medias have been talking about Finland's plans to host NATO's nuclear weapons and now in latest episode of leveli the hosts interview a nuclear expert who says that Olkiluoto 3 was created to produce nuclear weapon material.
What do you think? Could it be that Finland is planning not only to host NATO's nuclear weapons but they also plan to produce their own nuclear weapons? After all, Finland has been wanting to acquire nuclear weapons since 1958.
The information in the secret portfolio reveals the activities of the intelligence chief: President Kekkonen wanted a nuclear weapon https://www.iltalehti.fi/kotimaa/a/e9fa511a-dd58-4901-8ae1-094b8f2e579f
Also, delays on launching Olkiluoto 3 because of cracks in feedwater pumps. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/cracks-found-finnish-ol3-nuclear-reactors-feedwater-pumps-2022-10-28/
Hiring French & Russians to produce it using 3rd world workforce was a mistake. A lot of delays came when they couldn't follow Finnish safety requirements.
It's only safe & clean sustainable energy. Wind power & solar power are scams.
Coal is dirty as shit. Not only from mining it, but since it contains trace amounts of thorium and uranium, those get released into the air from burning it. Unless you’re going to refine the coal into a clean fuel, or make some giant water bong style filters for the smoke stacks, coal is worse than nuclear and also a finite resource. Once coal is all gone it’s gone, no more gets made unless we wipe out the world and it starts over from scratch. In which case we’re still like 300-450 million years away from having new coal.
Pretty sure you can make charcoal. Burning wood has almost the same effect. It however needs more wood for that efficiency.
Indeed we can make charcoal but charcoal isn’t coal. Switching to a wood based heat system IS doable, with proper forest management and logging, but coal itself it finite. It was generated millions of years ago before bacteria that breaks down and rots the tree down evolved. Trees died and fell and got compacted and nothing broke them down and the pressure and maybe some heat(I wasn’t there at the time, lol) changed the ancient cellulose strands from the wood we know and love into coal. I’d much rather see nuclear be used in the near future and save coal for later on. Maybe we invent a process that makes it a super battery, maybe we find a combination that results in a super fuel. We won’t be able to do that if we simply burn it all when there’s better options.
Yes. However charcoal is almost as good, better in some regards, better extraction, except needs far more to be efficient. It is renewable not finite. No, we aren't running out of coal. Not yet in any event.
Nuclear isn't effective when it comes to furnaces. Redundant in fact. Smelting, concrete, metals, steel, glass. Gas is by far and wide a better means. However it is also costly. Electricity requires far more parts, far more power. Making furnace, like turning on kettle, huge drain.
Power generation yes nuclear is without equals, it delivers far more output effectively.
But it's a narrative. A narrative of using non carbon based power sources. Absurdly in many regards. We are on a carbon planet and it has recycled that fuel already. Humans just charge more for their bullshit. Stop man making fire by charging them for electricity. Smells like a bigger con. Look at the price. They still burn it anyway. But the emissions, yes more of them shit everywhere. They aren't clean if they're invasive, computer don't grow on trees.
Seems to me like any nuclear facility can masquerade as a power plant or weapons plant. They can do both. The byproduct of nuclear power plants is stuff like depleted uranium which is used in ammunition.
Think about the implications...
Your enemy has a nuclear power plant. You want to destroy it. That will cut off power to thousands of civilians. What do you do? Convince your nation in the media that it's a nuclear weapons plant. (Similar to Iran and the Stuxnet virus that destroyed their facility)
Or consider the situation in reverse. You have a nuclear weapons plant at the border of Russia. You claim its a power plant.
Pretty convenient to have this kind of advanced facility that "maybe kills people" or "maybe keeps people alive". And with this gray area, a sheepish public is easy to manipulate in regards to environmental protection, nuclear waste, war, etc. The Schrodinger's cat of facilities.
All light water reactors produce Pu-239. Near the end of a fuel cycle, the majority of energy is released by Pu-239 fissions. It's just how it works.