Rumsfeld Seeks to Revive Burrowing Nuclear Bomb

[truthpusher]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52564-2005Jan31.html?nav=rss_politics

Rumsfeld Seeks to Revive Burrowing Nuclear Bomb
Bush Budget May Fund Program That Congress Cut

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 1, 2005; Page A02

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld sent a memo last month to then-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham saying next year's budget should include funds to resume study of building an earth-penetrating nuclear weapon designed to destroy hardened underground targets.

An Energy Department official said yesterday that $10.3 million to restart that study is expected to be included in the Bush administration's budget, which is to be released next week.

The study, which had been undertaken at the Los Alamos, Sandia and Livermore national laboratories, was halted late last year after Congress deleted $27.5 million for it from the fiscal 2005 Omnibus Appropriations Bill.

The research project was started in 2002 as a three-year effort to see if an existing nuclear warhead could be fitted with a hardened casing allowing it to dig deep into the earth before exploding. The program has been restricted each year by Senate and House members who have argued that even studying the potential for such a new nuclear weapon undermines Washington's attempts to limit other countries from developing their own nuclear arsenals.

more:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52564-2005Jan31.html?nav=rss_politics

[poe]

1. The Hydrogen Economy is Really the Nuclear Economy

http://www.energybulletin.net/4189.html The hydrogen economy is really a nuclear economy. Investors and the rest of corporate America may not realise how close the country is to making a gigantic bet on a nuclear future. The scientists and engineers at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory have been developing the advanced nuclear technologies that would power the hydrogen world.

Among the designs the INEEL has been working on is the Very High Temperature Reactor, the one best suited to provide the process heat necessary to break hydrogen apart from water so it can be turned into fuel. (There are a few issues with storing hydrogen, but we won't deal with them here.) Among the high temperature reactor variants is the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor being developed here and in China.

I asked Dr Steve Herring of the INEEL how many of these new, relatively efficient reactors would be needed to displace the estimated US fuel import requirements 20 years from now. Based on the Energy Information Administration's estimate of 2025 fuel imports (measured in quads, or quadrillion British thermal units), the output of 300MW per VHTR reactor, and the comparative efficiency of hydrogen fuel compared to gasoline, you come up with a requirement of about 4,000 reactors.

Now these reactors are much smaller than most of the power reactors in operation, but that's still a significant number. However, the US used to have more than 1,000 land-based nuclear ballistic missiles in underground silos. The relatively small VHTR reactors might be housed in underground facilities that wouldn't be much bigger.

Anti-nuclear activists want hydrogen fuel to come from renewable energy sources, such as wind power. However, that arithmetic doesn't work. For example, California has the most developed wind power industry in the US. Its share of those reactors in 2025, based on population, would be about 480. The entire current wind development in California would only account for four reactors' worth of energy for hydrogen production.

[VegasWolf]

2. and they want to tell the rest of the world that they can't have nukes.

[DELUSIONAL]

3. he wants to use it on Iran

these creeps want to drop nukes -- they probably have the potential targets on a dart board.

These idiots scare the hell out of me.

Racists -- and this includes Missy ConLizeAwholelot Rice crispiness.

[Heyo]

5. All things aside...

... I would like to have been around during the days of atmospheric testing and witnessed an atomic test.

You know, like a few miles away with those welding glasses on, when they set off one of those big 2-stage fission-fusion bombs, like a few megatons of yield. Not that I am advocating the use of nukes, or glorifying them. I just love science and physics, and I would really dig seeing it in person in a controlled test. I bet it's pretty bad ass.

Call me nuts.

(sorry, this was off topic, but it just made me think of that)

Heyo

[mulethree]

13. about 200 sq miles per megaton

to cover you with second degree burns.

About 9 mile radius at 1MT -> 35 miles at 20MT
About 75% of that distance if you're a brick building.

Maybe someone could do a computer-generated IMAX
on those lines. Use a variety of hometowns since
deserts and oceans don't show the scale. Include
the after-affects too - fires, slow painful death,
fallout, leukemia years later and hundreds and
thousands of miles away.

[daleo]

17. I recall reading that many people would turn and run

Even though they were at a safe distance the psychological impulse was often supposed to be overwhelming. One anti-nuclear activist even suggested that world leaders (especially of nuclear powers) should be forced to watch a test shot every decade or so, to impress upon them what they are really dealing with.

[Johnny_Ramone]

26. Do you have a link?

I would really like to read some of that stuff...

[daleo]

27. Afraid not

I read it quite a long time ago, in a magazine I think. It was probably during the Reagan nuclear buildup. If I find a reference, I will post it though.

[daleo]

28. Here is a scary report from a 1958 witness to a test, though

http://www.janesoceania.com/kiribati_mcginley/

""Cover your eyes!" bawled the voice from the loudspeakers. I had my fists shoved into my eyes and my back to the area where the bomb was going off. At the moment of detonation there was a flash. At that instant I was able to see straight through my hands. I could see the veins. I could see the blood, I could see all the skin tissue, I could see the bones and worst of all, I could see the flash itself. It was like looking into a white-hot diamond, a second sun.

Then the heat came. A slow, intense, searing heat which ate its way into your very bones. It didn't feel "... as if someone has passed an electric fire behind us". On the contrary, it felt as if someone had passed an electric fire through us. I let out a scream with the scorching pain.

"Okay, look at the bomb now," said the voice from the PA system.

The whole scene was unbelievable. A gigantic, dirty-looking mushroom cloud was forming on the horizon. An enormous ball of fire inhabited the base of the cloud and deadly-looking ripples of waves began to emanate from its base. It headed directly for us as we stood on the beach. I quickly glanced around me at the other men just as we got hit by a gale. Some tents got wrecked and the cookhouse collapsed."

[daleo]

30. Lots of stories on this site, too

http://www.aracnet.com/~pdxavets/upshot.htm

[TheWraith]

29. I bet it would be very impressive.

Probably take ten years off the lives of everyone present, too, but still impressive.

[jimshoes]

31. I suspect that after having viewed one

you would very likely gain a new respect for the horrible weapon that they are. Some years back I believe a Congressman was regretting somewhat the abolishment of above ground testing only because they showed what a frightful weapon they truly are. In a way I wish they would carry off an above ground explosion if only for that reason. On the other hand I'm glad no one has because they are really do leave a lot of airborne radioactivity around.

[Heyo]

35. agreed...

...nobody has seen what they truly can do in the last couple decades. The French still test them, but underground or underwater.

I had read a similar story as the one posted above, where a guy was on an aircraft, x number of miles from the shot, and had been issued the glasses with the knob for the adjustable light level.

Right as the shot went off he went to adjust the knob all the way to it's darkest setting as he'd been instructed, but the glasses broke and the lens fell out, so he put his hands over his eyes and saw an x-ray of his bones inside his hand.

Physics is some amazing stuff...I would've liked to see the Castle Bravo shot at Bikini... (but I sure wish it didn't irradiate Rongelap atoll)

Heyo

[lovuian]

4. Is it ever enough Rumsfeld needs a grip on reality

Nukes don't work :nuke:

[Bozita]

6. Saddam has concrete bunkers deep underground -- Remember that BS?

It's deja-vu all over again.

[VegasWolf]

7. If they fuck up Iran's oil with nuclear radiation, then it just makes

bush's iraqi oil that much more valuable.

[Sirveri]

8. Burrowing nukes are VERY nasty.

If they go too shallow they'll kick up a ton of radioactive particulates into the air and cause horrible ammounts of fallout. Then again if they go deep enough they'd be really clean.

Only reason I can personally think of for building things like this is for a first strike against hardened enemy nuclear silos. Which is completly pointless against anyone with a viable submarine based detterance like we and Russia have.

So probably the best target for these first strike weapons would be China.

Otherwise I don't understand the point, it would be much simpler to simply use conventional (already developed) weapons that wouldn't poison the local water table. I mean, if they burrowed deep enough to not kick up radioactive dust into the atmosphere, then they're not going to really do much against the surface aside from making a fairly sizeable crater under it. But we've already got weapons specifically designed to do that, we use them to take out enemy runways and roads, they burrow under the ground and blow up.

Whatever.

[phaseolus]

9. I thought it was pretty well proven that these would never work

Basic physics -- once your bomb is above a certain mass, it will break apart before burrowing. If it's light enough to burrow, it's not heavy enough to go deep enough to do any damage to most bunkers...and the shape of 'em makes them tend to come back out of the ground before detonating.

They'll never, ever be able to go deep enough.

Idiots.

[DELUSIONAL]

10. Faith based "science"

If Rummy or bushie order this then they will find "scientists" who will take the money to develop the bombs. Just like the "star wars" shield that is supposed to shoot down incoming missiles. Star wars doesn't work -- and this sounds like another "bright" idea that doesn't work.

[phaseolus]

11. What could be more likely...

...is that they know these won't work for their purported purpose yet they sell *this* plan while surreptitiously work on something *else*. I'm guessing there is some other kind of nuke they want to work on which would have been a tougher sell than a safe clean underground burrowing bunker buster.

Remember how the started the Iraq caper under the pretext of saving us from those mythical WMDs, which everyone here at DU knew didn't exist, when their real aim is (as far as we can tell) a swath of tame puppet states created in their image stretching from Morocco to Kazakhstan...

[sweetheart]

12. I think its slightly more advanced than that

THe concept as i understand it, is to put a nuclear weapon inside
what amounts to a giant gun barrell with a DU tip... and then to
"fire" it in to the ground just like an armour penetrating bullett.

just the problem, as anyone who has fired a gun in to the dirt can
confess, is that even a very fast projectile, well designed, has
limited penetrating capability.... especially for a well designed
underground facility... a couple meters of steel-reinforced concrete
near the surface and the nukes stays topside killing civilians with a
massive radioactive-dirt zero altitude blast... the ugliest radiation
blast.

The japanese have designed nuclear reactors to take direct hits from
missiles and aircraft... and i've seen theez videos where the entire
missile/aircraft disintegrates on the ultra-hard surface of the
hardened bunker... this technology is like star wars... pure bushit.
If you believe it will work then, take your rifle out to an area of
hard granite and start shooting bullets at the rock (from far away
(behind something)) to see how far they penetrate.. (not at all).

With a proper lapidary drill, designed to break through hard rock, it
can take hours to penetrate hard rock.... what special powers they
give to their nuclear devices, i'm more than skeptical...as the
whole trigger and assembly will never ever survive the impact G-force.

Bullshit rumsfeld... more lies like you've been spewing for the last
30 years in public... you belong in the galllows, not on camera..
flaccid ignorant f**k.... evil SOB... grrrr....

[uppityperson]

14. So?

Think that'll slow them down in making them?

[genieroze]

15. They will most likely use DU bunker busters armed with small nukes.

[daleo]

16. They love their burrowing bombs

They are just like little ferrets, I guess.

Harper's had a short article a while back explaining why these things won't actually work. In a nutshell, no physical object (i.e. bomb) can withstand the stresses that it would undergo during the "burrowing" phase past a certain limited point. (Burrowing just uses the kinetic energy the bomb gains while falling from high in the atmosphere.) So, the bomb can't penetrate far and still blow up.

Blowing up at the levels it can withstand would produce a tremendous amount of fallout, though. Ironically, the shock isn't transmitted that far in the earth, so digging down deep in hard rock will circumvent pretty well any attack.

But research and development of these bombs spends a lot of government money, which is the primary purpose of the research anyway.

[IndianaGreen]

18. The US should test it first on Cheney's "undisclosed location"

that's the only way to see if the bomb will destroy scum buried deeply into the Earth.

[truthpusher]

19. Cheney's undisclosed location...

[oly]

20. These guys are having a harder and harder time getting off on

killing with conventional bombs. If they had these smaller nukes, they would use them. I have no doubt. Look out Laura.

[Doctor Panacea]

21. Kids with firecrackers

It has nothing to do with real security. It is all about corporate welfare for the military-industrial complex, and the fun of finding a new way to blow something up, like kids with firecrackers.

"Wow, gee, that was neat!" as the tin can goes flying into the air from the cherry bomb under it.

[DC Law]

22. the writing on the wall

You all recall Seymour Hersh's article about Iran? In it, he talks about how, after Israel bombed Iraq's Osirak reactor, Iran sought to drive its facilities underground and throughout the East. These are the targets of the new surveillance there.

These new nukes, beyond the serious question of whether they will work, are probably intended to reach, or at least *threaten* to reach, such underground nuclear facillities in Iran, if the Administration ever builds up the gall to take action there.

[Tyler Durden]

23. How about we make one that burrows up Rummy's ASS?

I LIKE that idea.

[yellowcanine]

24. Yes, strap that man down and give him a colonoscopy already.

Must make sure he doesn't have any polyps or whatever.

[Richard Steele]

25. The colonoscope itself isn't all that bad....

...it's that damned hundred-watt bulb on the end!

[Thor_MN]

33. Run it in Full length, hook tip into a hard left, Chain to a passing car.

That ought to hold him.

[Megahurtz]

32. Oh, but it's okay for the U.S. to have nuclear weapons

but not for anybody else!:eyes:

[sakabatou]

34. Sounds like someone watched too many Bond movies...

Besides I though Bush I froze nuclear testing for this kind of stuff.

[Disturbed]

36. It is possible that the Bush Junta will be vaporized.

If these maniacs keep going it is possible that there may be an accident that vaporizes the lot of these bush Junta fools. The Oligarchy will not allow them to go too far.

[Moderator]

37. kick

[tuvor]

38. Rumsfeld asks for restoration of nuclear 'bunker buster' program

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has asked for the restoration of a research program designed to create a new type of nuclear weapons capable of destroying hardened underground targets, a Pentagon (news - web sites) official said.

The request came in a letter Rumsfeld sent to then-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham (news - web sites) on January 10, in which he insisted that funds for studying the feasibility of the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator be restored.

"The Defense Department does support completion of the penetrator study," Major Paul Swiergosz, a department spokesman, told AFP. "We can't necessarily match Cold War weapons to the new threats. We have to adapt capabilities that we have to meet the threats."

A spokesman for the Department of Energy (news - web sites) that runs US nuclear weapons research declined to say what the response would be. Abraham was replaced by Samuel Bodman on January 11.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1503&e=17&u=/afp/usweaponsnuclear

[mn9driver]

39. He wants this to be a rush job.

It'll make the liberation of Iran and North Korea SO much easier.

:puke:

[riverwalker]

40. where is Freud when we need him?

"Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator" in other words, Rummy wants to f*** mother earth, literally.

[Nihil]

42. Good catch!

Symbolic of the entire Bush administration really isn't it?

[bif]

41. These guys are fuckin' nuts

But we knew that.

[bobthedrummer]

43. He's into the dogma of US militarism and coup like RPMA/RMA

Revolution in Political and Military Affairs/RPMA, Revolution in Military Affairs/RMA.

RPMA
http://www.guerrillacampaign.com/coup.htm

RMA
http://www.datafilter.com/mc/rmaWarCollege.html

[mojavekid]

44. Rumsfeld; "Give me back my toy!!" n/t

[truthisfreedom]

45. bushco is fascinated with anything that reminds them of a parasite.

"burrowing." right up their alley.