Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (882283)	8/24/2015 7:56:15 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574439

I'm not going to dissect the document Of course you aren't. Why risk actually knowing what you are talking about? It is claimed some are perpetual but obviously, it becomes difficult or impossible to enforce a provision like that. Nothing obvious about that. IAEA has been doing this for decades. Lots of countries enrich uranium for reactors and other uses. Most of them are being monitored by the IAEA to make sure they aren't building weapons. Of course, this isn't true of the US, Israel, Russia or China. Power reactors are a legitimate use for enriched uranium. One that Iran says they want the enriched uranium for. Most reactors need the uranium to be enriched to anywhere from 6% to 20%, depending on the technology. a) If they can get by ten years without enriching, why can't they get by indefinitely without it? If you had read even the first couple of pages of the document you would know the answer. For one, they don't have to stop enriching uranium. They just cannot have more than a certain amount and it can be no more that 20% enriched. Which isn't enough for a weapon, but just fine to run a reactor. What they can't do is use more advanced centrifuges for the next ten years. Even then, they cannot enrich uranium at a higher rate than they can do now. b) If it is to our advantage for them to not enrich for 10 years, why is the advantage not greater for 20 years? See above.