Iran starts nuclear reactor; says intent peaceful

Pavel123

後輩
Joined
13 Sep 2007
Messages
275
Reaction score
2
Iran starts nuclear reactor; says intent peaceful

Sunday 22nd August, 06:10 AM JST

BUSHEHR, Iran —

Trucks rumbled into Iran's first reactor Saturday to begin loading tons of uranium fuel in a long-delayed startup touted by officials as both a symbol of the country's peaceful intentions to produce nuclear energy as well as a triumph over Western pressure to rein in its nuclear ambitions.

The Russian-built Bushehr nuclear power plant will be internationally supervised, including a pledge by Russia to safeguard it against materials being diverted for any possible use in creating nuclear weapons. Iran's agreement to allow the oversight was a rare compromise by the Islamic state over its atomic program.

Western powers have cautiously accepted the deal as a way to keep spent nuclear fuel from crossing over to any military use. They say it illustrates their primary struggle: to block Iran's drive to create material that could be used for nuclear weapons and not its pursuit of peaceful nuclear power.

Iran has long declared it has a right like other nations to produce nuclear energy. The country's nuclear chief described the startup as a ツ"symbol of Iranian resistance and patience.ツ"

ツ"Despite all pressure, sanctions and hardships imposed by Western nations, we are now witnessing the startup of the largest symbol of Iran's peaceful nuclear activities,ツ" Ali Akbar Salehi told reporters inside the plant with its cream-colored dome overlooking the Persian Gulf in southern Iran.

In several significant ways, the Bushehr plant stands apart from the showdowns over Iranian uranium enrichment, a process that can be used both to produce nuclear energy or nuclear weapons. It also could offer a possible test run for proposals to ease the impasse.

The Russian agreement to control the supply of nuclear fuel at Bushehr eased opposition by Washington and allies. Bushehr's operations are not covered by U.N. sanctions imposed after Iran refused to stop uranium enrichment. And last week, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said the Russian oversight at Bushehr is the ツ"very modelツ" offered Tehran under a U.N.-drafted plan unveiled last year.

That proposal—so far snubbed by Iran—called for Iran to halt uranium enrichment and get its supplies of reactor-ready material from abroad.

Western leaders fear Iran's enrichment labs could one day churn out weapons-grade material. Iran claims it has no interest in nuclear arms, but refuses to give up the right to make its own fuel.

Iran has some of the world's biggest oil reserves, but lacks refinery capacity to meet domestic demand and must repurchase fuel on international markets. Nuclear power is seen as both a goal to meet power needs and an important technological achievement for the Islamic government.

The French Foreign Ministry said the Russian deal shows Iran does not need to enrich uranium to benefit from civilian nuclear power.

ツ"This clearly shows that the sanctions do not aim to deprive Iran of its right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful uses,ツ" said the French statement.

In London, a Foreign Office junior minister, Alistair Burt, said the loading of Russian fuel at Bushehr ツ"demonstrates that Iran can have the benefits of nuclear power.ツ"

But conservative Iranian lawmaker Arsalan Faithipour struck a tone of defiance.

ツ"The startup at Bushehr proved the ineffectiveness of sanctions,ツ" he said.

After years of delays in completing the plant, Moscow now claims that the project is essential to persuading Iran to cooperate with international efforts to ensure it does not develop the bomb.

Iran has said that monitors from the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, will have access to the fuel shipments at Bushehr, about 745 miles (1,200 kilometers) south of Tehran. Spent fuel contains plutonium, which can be used to make atomic weapons.

U.N. nuclear inspectors were on hand Saturday as the first truckloads of fuel were taken from a storage site to a ツ"poolツ" inside the reactor. Over the next two weeks, 163 fuel assemblies—equal to 80 tons of uranium fuel—will be moved inside the building and then into the reactor core.

It will be another two months before the 1,000-megawatt light-water reactor—heavily guarded by soldiers and anti-aircraft batteries—is pumping electricity to Iranian cities.

Two weeks ago, two Iranian drones were sent over Bushehr to test of air defense capability. The drones were picked up, but were grounded before forces guarding the nuclear plant could open fire, Bushehr Provincial Gov. Mohammad Hossein Jahanbakhsh told The Associated Press.

ツ"The decision had been to test the capability of the Bushehr air defense system. The reaction was appropriate and authorities were happy,ツ" he said.

The uranium fuel Russia has supplied for Bushehr is well below the more than 90% enrichment needed for a nuclear warhead. Iran is already producing its own uranium enriched to the Bushehr level—about 3.5%. It also has started a pilot program of enriching uranium to 20%, which officials say is needed for a medical research reactor.

Salehi said Iran will continue to enrich uranium to 20%, but had no intention to continuing the higher level of enrichment forever.

Iran raised more alarm in the West with its recent declaration of plans to build 10 new uranium enrichment sites inside protected mountain strongholds. It said it will begin construction on the first one in March in defiance of the U.N. sanctions.

ツ"Today is a historic day and will be remembered in history,ツ" Salehi said at a news conference alongside the head of Russia's state-run nuclear corporation, Sergei Kiriyenko.

ツ"The countdown to the Bushehr nuclear power plant has started,ツ" Kiriyenko said. ツ"Congratulations.ツ"

Russia signed a $1 billion contract to build the Bushehr plant in 1995 but has dragged its feet on completing the work. Moscow had cited technical reasons for the delays, but analysts say Russia used the project to try to press Iran to ease its defiance over uranium enrichment.

Iran has announced plans to build other reactors and says designs for a second rector in southwestern Iran are taking shape.

Link: Iran starts nuclear reactor; says intent peaceful

"Peaceful"? LMFAO! Really? I find it rediculous that all the countries are blind to realise that it ain't no peaceful act. I don't think that Iran wants to use this nuclear reactor for peaceful things... :eek:
 
Can anyone explain why the Russians don't seem to care if they wind up with a radical-Islamic nuclear power right next door?
 
I find it rediculous that all the countries are blind to realise that it ain't no peaceful act.

I'm sorry, but the reactor is being supervised by Russia. The uranium is also not enriched enough to be remotely viable for use in a weapon. I understand the clash between Israel and it's Arabic/Muslim neighbors, but I think it's the right of Iran to at least be given the chance to safely harness nuclear power. Nothing like holding a country back due to differences between it and another group of people.

With that said, it must never be forgotten that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a jerk. But it also must be said that Benjamin Netanyahu is also a war-mongering jerk. See, Iran and Israel have something in common. Both of it's leaders are jerks.

"Peaceful"? LMFAO! Really?

Your argument is compelling and I can't help but agree with this statement, or lack there-of.

I don't think that Iran wants to use this nuclear reactor for peaceful things... :eek:

What are they going to do with it then? Oh, I know! Pollute the atmosphere with the toxins released from it's usage. Those dastardly jerks are trying to destroy the ozone!

captainplanetjpeg-1.webp


Where's Captain Planet when you need him? ._.
 
I'm sorry, but the reactor is being supervised by Russia. The uranium is also not enriched enough to be remotely viable for use in a weapon. I understand the clash between Israel and it's Arabic/Muslim neighbors, but I think it's the right of Iran to at least be given the chance to safely harness nuclear power. Nothing like holding a country back due to differences between it and another group of people.

Yeah, Russia supervise it, but for how long can they maintain control over it? For how long? For one year? Two? Three? They won't supervise it forever y'know... If we all give them the chance, and it turns out to be our doom, then what will you say? Everyone knows that the Iranians political views are radical. They are not interested to listen to anyone that says something against them. How the hell can we give them a chance to maintain nuclear power, when they are short-tempered?!

With that said, it must never be forgotten that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a jerk. But it also must be said that Benjamin Netanyahu is also a war-mongering jerk. See, Iran and Israel have something in common. Both of it's leaders are jerks.

And about Benjamin Netanyahu being a war-mongering jerk. i knew this all the time. He's a stupid president. All the things he promised to us is load of BS. He promised to make our country safe, but the jerk just goes out there and boils the things up even more. I never liked him and never will. And now with the stupid talks about attacking the nuclear reactor, all hell is going to break loose... :(

And just for the record, to be peaceful you don't need a nuclear reactor. You need to start trying to put peace in the first place. If anyone in the world thinks that a nuclear weapon is a way to show peace, can go smash his head on the wall, maybe his brains understand after that, that there's no place for nuclear weaponry in PEACE... Peace is made by people, not by nuclear weapons...
 
What are they going to do with it then? Oh, I know! Pollute the atmosphere with the toxins released from it's usage. Those dastardly jerks are trying to destroy the ozone!

Yes, because we all know that it is a great thing for a batshit crazy theocracy to have nuclear technology supervised by an arguably totalitarian country notorious for the illegal sale of weapons big and small by military people.
 
Good for Iran! Even Australia does not have a working energy producing nuclear reactor. Hopefully their intentions are honestly good and they continue to enjoy many years of nuclear power.

Now I wonder what sort of reactor they are using? Some are "cleaner" than others, and need different levels of fuels and have different by-products and wastes.
 
And just for the record, to be peaceful you don't need a nuclear reactor. You need to start trying to put peace in the first place. If anyone in the world thinks that a nuclear weapon is a way to show peace, can go smash his head on the wall,

You do know there's a difference between a nuclear reactor and a nuclear weapon........right?

And just for the record, to be peaceful you don't need a nuclear reactor.

They're not using the nuclear reactor to be peaceful, they're pledging to use it in a peaceful manner. There's another distinction you've failed to grasp and that might be contributing to why you're so incredulous.

If you want to know how to keep an angry, backwards, belligerent country angry, backwards, and belligerent, just keep them in the stoneage by preventing them from building any decent sources of electricity while buying their own natural resources out from under them.
I think every country deserves to reap the benefits of nuclear power. Lord knows the fossil fuels are going to be gone before we know it, and we don't have any other good alternatives at the moment. If you have any better ideas, I'm sure Iran would be delighted to hear them.
 
Yes, because we all know that it is a great thing for a batshit crazy theocracy to have nuclear technology supervised by an arguably totalitarian country notorious for the illegal sale of weapons big and small by military people.

I think you're not being very fair to Russians, Derfel. They are actually quite nice. :?
 
Pavel123 said:
If anyone in the world thinks that a nuclear weapon is a way to show peace, can go smash his head on the wall, maybe his brains understand after that, that there's no place for nuclear weaponry in PEACE... Peace is made by people, not by nuclear weapons...
Really? Have you ever heard of the acronym MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) that was so common in the 70's and 80's? If all have nuclear weapons no one will use them because they will only be assuring their own destruction. If one has them, then all should have them.

Sure, Iran's president, "Imanutjob", talks big and all about Israels destruction, but do you honestly believe he would be stupid enough to use them? He would immediately assure his own country's destruction by what's left of Israel, or the US or GB. If Iran does get them, they will assure their own survival, Pakistan and India both have nuclear weapons, thus assuring their own safety as neither one would dare use it on the other.

JimmySeal said:
If you want to know how to keep an angry, backwards, belligerent country angry, backwards, and belligerent, just keep them in the stoneage by preventing them from building any decent sources of electricity while buying their own natural resources out from under them.
I think every country deserves to reap the benefits of nuclear power. Lord knows the fossil fuels are going to be gone before we know it, and we don't have any other good alternatives at the moment. If you have any better ideas, I'm sure Iran would be delighted to hear them.
Not only that Jimmy, but by preventing a country from going nuclear, you assure yourself that they will have no other choice but to keep on buying your oil and, in the case of poorer countries, you keep them indebted to you by having to borrow money to buy that oil. Or, they remain poor because so much of their GDP is going to the purchase of those resources. Also, if they can't pay back their loans they usually forfeit what natural resources they do have. This has been going on for decades and will continue to do so.

I also don't believe in the theory of finite oil. I believe in the theory of abiotic oil in that the earth keeps on producing this oil much like the human body produces it's own blood after some is extracted. I know it's not a great analogy, but I have read a few leaked documents on line years ago from oil companies stating that so-called "dry wells" were replenished after a number of years. We were all told in the 70's that peak oil was at hand and that it would be exhausted by the turn of the century. Didn't happen did it?

I believe it never will be exhausted because if that were the case we would be seeing the quick implementation of new forms of energy which are already there and waiting to be used. Also, if it were truly peak oil, and the oil companies knew it, why would China not be using these new forms of energy in abundance, or demanding that all their newly produced cars run off of alternative forms of energy only like soy beans, peanut oil, water, etc. which is quite simple? Why? Because, either the oil companies are forcing it on them or they also know there will be no shortage of oil for their future needs.
 
Perhaps a clarification of English usage is appropriate.

When we say that Iran is trying to become "a nuclear power," it means they're trying to acquire nuclear weapons and/or the capacity to make them.

When we say that Iran is trying to get "nuclear power," it means they're seeking nuclear-power-generating facilities.

I don't have a problem with the latter, but am skeptical that a nation sitting on all that oil needs nuclear power. Nuclear-power only becomes competitive with oil when oil prices are high.

It seems entirely plausible to me that Iran is pursuing nuclear power in order to conduct a parallel program to obtain plutonium and make nuclear weapons. The Iranians could quickly dispel these fears by opening ALL of their facilities to international inspection. Instead, they've been secretive and clandestine about their nuclear programs.
 
RolandtheHeadless said:
I don't have a problem with the latter, but am skeptical that a nation sitting on all that oil needs nuclear power. Nuclear-power only becomes competitive with oil when oil prices are high.

It seems entirely plausible to me that Iran is pursuing nuclear power in order to conduct a parallel program to obtain plutonium and make nuclear weapons.
In this I totally agree. Iran sits on one of the world's largest oil supplies, but I still believe that even if they can produce one, it will assure their own safety. The scary part is if they will sell that plutonium to terrorists as who can guarantee that Russia will get a hold of all the fuel rods? Then there will be no country to blame if a nuclear device goes off. That is probably what the world is worried about and why they are dead-set against Iran having a reactor.

On another note: Iran Minister Visits China for Refinery Investment
The visit comes as new sanctions imposed over Iran's nuclear programme take effect, squeezing its ability to import gasoline and making it increasingly difficult to get foreign investment and expertise to help increase refining capacity.

As the toughest sanctions come from the United States and Europe, Tehran has looked for investment to China, which is interested in Iran's vast oil resources.

Iran is the world's fifth-largest oil producer, but a lack of sufficient refining capacity forces it to import up to 40 percent of its gasoline needs.
 
I think this will turn out great. I am willing to bet that countries such as Israel, The United state, and china, will not let this set entirely in Russian and Iranian hands, even if it means sending spies. I am also willing to bet, that both Russia and Iran's governments are counting on spies, meaning better security, even if it is just in hopes of weeding out spies, it is still more security, and also less chance of anything unwanted actually happening out of fear of a nuclear war.
 
I think this will turn out great. I am willing to bet that countries such as Israel, The United state, and china, will not let this set entirely in Russian and Iranian hands, even if it means sending spies. I am also willing to bet, that both Russia and Iran's governments are counting on spies, meaning better security, even if it is just in hopes of weeding out spies, it is still more security, and also less chance of anything unwanted actually happening out of fear of a nuclear war.

A nuclear power plant is a positive for the Iranian people. The current president will eventually be replaced. Iran and Israel will get along eventually one day, especially when they figure out the rest of the world doesn't want anything to do with their bickering, with exception to protecting their own from the madness that is nuclear weaponry.

To be honest..I'm more concerned with Israel nuking an Islamic country than I am with an Islamic country such as Iran nuking Israel. You have to think in terms of who has more to lose, and I believe that it's the Islamic countries. I think Netanyahu has this delusion that the USA would support them in an attack against Iran, when in actuality, the majority of Americans are against another conflict, especially a Middle-Eastern one.
 
Back
Top Bottom