Iran Claims New Nuclear Breakthrough

[kashifshahzad]

Iran Claims New Nuclear Breakthrough
AFP
Tue, 30 Aug 2005, 10:09

Tehran: Iran announced Monday it has made another breakthrough in its controversial nuclear programme by successfully using biotechnology to extract purer uranium from its mines.
A report on state television said researchers from Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, after six years of research, had mastered the technique of employing microbes to purify uranium ore in mines prior to mining.

It said "using biotechnology substantially decreases the cost, increases optimisation and prevents environmental contamination" in the process that leads to the production of yellowcake, or concentrated uranium oxide.

The report, quoting a senior researcher, said the microbes were "successfully used in experimental stages" in central Iran's uranium mines.

"This bacteria is very valuable" and makes the production of yellowcake "100 to 200 times cheaper", he said.

Yellowcake is a part of the early stages of the nuclear fuel cycle -- a process that Iran insists it only wants to master so it can generate electricity.

The United States in particular accuses Iran of using atomic energy as a cover for nuclear weapons development.

The latest development, touted by state television as a "breakthrough", is likely to reinforce the impression among Iran's critics that even though Tehran has been forced to suspend certain fuel cycle activities it has continued to make great strides on others.

To make yellowcake, first uranium ore must be mined, then milled and processed in acid. But often mined ore is of a very low concentration and extraction involves expensive and hazardous processes such as roasting and smelting.

Using biotechnology -- or a technique known as "bioleaching" -- a bacteria introduced to the ore, eats on iron sulphur and produces sulphuric acid which in turn dissolves the ore and separates the uranium.

This then makes yellowcake production easier.

On August 8 Iran chose to end its freeze on the conversion of yellowcake to uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6) at a facility near the central city of Isfahan.

The Islamic republic had agreed to suspend fuel cycle work, but partially broke the freeze in retaliation to demands from Britain, France and Germany that it scrap its fuel cycle programme in exchange for a package of incentives.

Iran insists it has the "right" to a peaceful nuclear programme as a signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Yellowcake production and conversion is a precursor to the ultra-sensitive process of enrichment, which involves UF6 being spun through cascades of centrifuges to produce enriched uranium.

When enriched to low levels, reactor fuel is produced.

But high levels of enrichment can produce the core of a nuclear weapon -- hence the demands of the EU-3 and the United States for Iran to abandon the fuel cycle altogether as the best "objective guarantee" it will not acquire the bomb.

So far Iran has agreed to maintain a freeze of enrichment at a plant in Natanz, although the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) -- the UN's nuclear watchdog -- passed a resolution this month telling Iran to return to a full freeze.

Iran has refused, despite explicit threats -- including one from French President Jacques Chirac -- that it faces referral to the UN Security Council.

In a separate announcement, state television said hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had decided to keep on Gholam Reza Aghazadeh as head of the Atomic Energy Organisation and one of his seven vice presidents.

The presidential decree called on Aghazadeh to "use scientists, specialists and the young and creative forces in the organisation and to materialise the four principles of my government" -- which are justice, kindness, serving the people and spiritual and financial elevation."


URL of this article:
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_003209.php


New techniques in the Nuclear research field Intresting.Irianian scientists must be soo expert lets see what happens in the future
By the way i am reading this word for the first time " Yellow Cake"

 

[Defcon 6]

I hope they aren't building nuclear weapons when most of their people live in poverty. But hey, if they want to build the bomb then I hope they are prepared for a cold war.

 

[kashifshahzad]

I hope they aren't building nuclear weapons when most of their people live in poverty. But hey, if they want to build the bomb then I hope they are prepared for a cold war.

Poverty in an oil rich country i dont think so and can you tell me with who they are going to have cold war???

 

[aaaditya]

Poverty in an oil rich country i dont think so and can you tell me with who they are going to have cold war???

right now iran seems to be having a cold war with almost all western nations ,who are opposed to iran's nuclear programme.i believe only india,pakistan ,china and russia are supporting iran,these restrictions are very unfair for iran ,they have every right to develop what ever they want afterall they are a sovereign nation.:coffee

 

[hydraulic]

after sadam's regime has collapsed, Israel have made some extensive moved on the Gaza strip and toward the Palestinian freedom fighter leaders. So someone have to take the lead and dare enough to challange the Israel. At one time Iran is one of the most modern country in Arab nation. They have the capabality and they have the infrastructure, why they want to waste such oppotunity.Atleast now we can see some impovement that side.

 

[99Alpha]

Hello all

Does anybody know if South Africa is helping Iran with it's nuclear program?

 

[turin]

As far as I know South Africa has renounced its nuclear ambitions a long time ago and no further R&D in this direction was noted. Also there are no publicly known connections in this regard between SA and Iran. The most important supporter of the Iranian program is Russia, at least for the civilian part of the programme. Since most of this technology is dual use, Iran already has some solid stuff to work with.

At one time Iran is one of the most modern country in Arab nation.

Actually Iran is no arab nation at all.

 

[interseptor]

admin: deleted as it was fundamentally political and didn't address the thread topic. try again and keep it on topic.

 

[99Alpha]

Why would a country like Iran want to make use of nuclear energy when it has vast amounts of oil to use as fuel for power generation. Personally I believe it will be a huge threat to world peace should Iran join the nuclear club. Even if it is for so called peaceful purposes. Militarization of “peaceful†nuclear use will soon follow!! With Iran’s militant clerics and it’s support of terror organizations a nuclear bomb in Persia will be bad news for world stability.

 

[JunkerJu87Stuka]

i think iran is desperately seeking the nuclear insurance policy. unfortunately its become the rationale in today's world, see what North Korea did.... the last great nuclear rivalry was India and Pakistan ....sad alas we now see only save your butt nukes

 

[99Alpha]

Ju87 Yep I agree with your statement. The thing that worries me is that if Iran goes nuclear, and I believe it is only a matter of time, then Israel and ultimately the USA will be the target. The bothersome fact is that I believe that Iran or any other radical Muslim country or group will use a nuclear weapon/s against the said countries, whereas North Korea is just using the nuclear “threat†as a means to get aid and a measure of legitimacy for its archaic form of governance

 

[Lavi]

There is a great difference in the reason for having nukes between Iran and most other countries. Iran doesn't want some kind of mutually assured destruction, they want the destruction of Israel and the US! If this isn't a threat to world peace, then you tell me what is...

 

[turin]

they want the destruction of Israel and the US! If this isn't a threat to world peace, then you tell me what is...

While the "destruction of the US" may be part of polemics on the street and Iran never officially recognized Israel as a souvereign country, there is no such indication of a military confrontation aggressively pursued by Iran.Actually the whole military concept and procurements of Iran in the last time are supporting a scenario of maximum deterrence.
In fact the whole issue on indeginous development of nuclear weapons only gained momentum, when Bush, representing the US, directly threatened Iran by identifying it as part of the infamous "axis of evil" and later on repeatedly considering military action against Iran in official statements. So it is primarily the Bush-Administration, who, by employing shady definitions and agendas, made such a potential for escalation possible in the first place. By the way, the current adminstration of Iran is mostly a by-product of these actions as well, since Khatamis position as a moderate leader became unbearable under these circumstances.

But I guess this is going political big time, meaning we are into OT now.

 

[Cootamundra]

In fact the whole issue on indeginous development of nuclear weapons only gained momentum, when Bush, representing the US, directly threatened Iran by identifying it as part of the infamous "axis of evil" and later on repeatedly considering military action against Iran in official statements. So it is primarily the Bush-Administration, who, by employing shady definitions and agendas, made such a potential for escalation possible in the first place. By the way, the current adminstration of Iran is mostly a by-product of these actions as well, since Khatamis position as a moderate leader became unbearable under these circumstances.

But I guess this is going political big time, meaning we are into OT now.

Rubbish, the reason why Bush listed them as such was because of their aggressive stance on developing nuclear weapons. Iran and the Mullahs have been hell bent on developing a nuclear option for some time, this process increased markedly once Pakistan managed to be the first with the Islamic bomb. To write this off as being caused by Bush is pandering to the leftist media and those of you in Europe who think that talk will always work. The US has stayed well out of the recent efforts by the EU to halt Iran's march towards nuclear weapons, and unfortunately this process has failed.

Certainly Bush and his neo-cons can be blamed for many things but starting Iran on the path to nuclear weapons is NOT one of them

 

[99Alpha]

Certainly Bush and his neo-cons can be blamed for many things but starting Iran on the path to nuclear weapons is NOT one of them

I cant agree more! Why exactly does Iran need nuclear power? For electricity generation? When they have more then enough cheap oil to do the job?

Take South Africa as a case in point. They developed their (secret) nuclear weapons program in conjunction with their "peaceful" development (Koeberg power station in the Cape) of nuclear energy.

South Africa never used any of it's 5 nuclear bombs. Personally I do not believe that a country like Iran under the leadership of fanatical Muslim extremists will show the same restrtaint when it comes Israel or the USA for that matter.

 

[turin]

The US has stayed well out of the recent efforts by the EU to halt Iran's march towards nuclear weapons,

Nice work. The US stayed out, when they already screwed up the whole thing. Also the political stance of the US on Iran is weak, both in terms of statements threatening with military action, since US forces are overstretched already and budgetary planning is facing serious constraints, and because the position of the Bush-administration is a joke after their claimed reasons for going into Iraq in 2003, within the US as well as on the international level.
The "talk is useless"-claim is rubbish, since the european position in this regard is pretty much that of the US and UK, France and Germany are basically not willing to accept any option of development of nuclear energy whatsoever in Iran. Thats the whole point of their approach and thats the whole reason why Iran calls these demands untenable.

Certainly Bush and his neo-cons can be blamed for many things but starting Iran on the path to nuclear weapons is NOT one of them

If you would have read my post more carefully, then it would occur to you, that I never claimed the Bush-administration to have started such a development in the first place. I accused them of rapidly accelerating it because of their initial position towards an Iran under a moderate government, a government by the way, that, as a consequence, was abandoned in favor of a radical and fundamentalist leader called Ahmadinejad, who is in control now and who claims to represent the peoples best protection against western agression in sticking to the way of national independence following islamic principles. By the way, he was elected in perfect accordance to democratic principles so much promoted by the US.

I cant agree more! Why exactly does Iran need nuclear power? For electricity generation? When they have more then enough cheap oil to do the job?

Yeah right. Lets burn the oil and forget about the future. I am not saying, that Iran is purely interested in a civilian use of nuclear energy alone, however for the time, when oil runs out, as means of financing as well as means of energy source, nuclear energy is pretty much the best way for Iran.

While there might be some perspective for solar energy and wind energy as well, the nuclear issue is a much bigger one with the Iranian people. It is understood as basis for technological advances as well as a sign of national souvereignty. There will_be_no way the western nations will be able to persuade Iran to abandon any nuclear ambitions while retaining such a capability for themselves, especially under the current impression of immediate threat to Iran itself and how other regimes, who lacked such a nuclear capability, were tackled by the US (or were not, in the case of the potentially nuclear North Korea).

 

[Cootamundra]

If you would have read my post more carefully, then it would occur to you, that I never claimed the Bush-administration to have started such a development in the first place. I accused them of rapidly accelerating it because of their initial position towards an Iran under a moderate government, a government by the way, that, as a consequence, was abandoned in favor of a radical and fundamentalist leader called Ahmadinejad.

Fair enough, I see your point however I still don't agree, I think a radical Iran was always going to be on the cards. Their view is that NO-ONE from the West should be in the Middle East and that Israel should be removed - by force if necessary - it is this attitude that originally drove the current US Administration to take their original hardline. I'm mean its not that the US just decided that the Mullahs were dangerous, I think they learnt that well enough in the 70s.

Yeah right. Lets burn the oil and forget about the future. I am not saying, that Iran is purely interested in a civilian use of nuclear energy alone, however for the time, when oil runs out, as means of financing as well as means of energy source, nuclear energy is pretty much the best way for Iran.

OK, so they are worried about the environment, come on! Only in the West, your Europe, my Australia, do we have the luxury of worrying about the environment. They want nuclear power for the reasons you listed afterwards, national pride, nuclear technology AND MOST IMPORTANTLY WEAPONS! Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map, now despite the fact that Israel has done plenty to warrant critisim, nothing they have done deserves total destruction. The Iranian PM is crazy and Europe needs to follow through with their threats and ensure that Iran does not get nuc weapons (via whatever means are necessary).

 

[99Alpha]

The crux of the matter is that Iran can not be trusted with nuclear weapons. No matter how PC we would like to be in the final analysis the destruction of Israel and ultimately the USA/West is the overiding aim of a nuclear capable Iran.

 

[Defcon 6]

Iran with a nuclear bomb is just a disaster waiting to happen. If the arabs hadn't invaded israel a millenia ago, then we wouldn't have the problem we have now. What comes around goes around. Anyways, the Iranians decided to elect that nutcase themselves, don't blame that on the U.S.

I think the U.S should switch back to stock piling high powered thermonuclear bombs. Theres deterrence right there!

 

[turin]

OK, so they are worried about the environment, come on!

Actually I was referring to the oil running out.
I mean, come on, who believes the fairy tales that crude would be available for another 120 or so years?! Granted, there will be something left, but nothing for export in reasonable quantities or consumption at a moderate price, thats for sure!
And since Irans reserves right now are quite a point of interest, esp. with China taking a heavy interest in getting a share, Iran really HAS to worry about their future energy sources.

I'm mean its not that the US just decided that the Mullahs were dangerous, I think they learnt that well enough in the 70s.

Right. But you know, systems are changing. Even a fundamentalist one like Iran, and exactly that did happen in the 1990s with the advent of Khatami, a surprisingly moderate leader backed by intellectual circles, esp. students.
Yet it was against this moderate government that the current US administration decided to make their comments and the result was an estrangement even of moderate parts of the iranian people. So huge parts of the people decided to elect Ahmadinejad over the much more moderate Rafsanjani, since traditional ways and a strong position seemed to be the solution (and its a natural reaction, just look how american people resond to outside threats...patriotism all over the country).
By the way if your read comments of iranian politicians carefully, you may recognize that most of them dont really consider an active part of the iranian state in destroying Israel in its national form. This is no rhetorical nonsense but a sign of them being actively aware what the dire consequences for Iran would be. Of course that doesnt solve the issue of potential proliferation, however in that regard an isolated Iran IMO is a much more dangerous thing than one integrated into cooperation with the international community.

If the arabs hadn't invaded israel a millenia ago

Please dont get historical about this or we might complain about the egyptians enslaving the jews in the first place or something like that... :smash