[EA-3167]

DOGE was a joke, the DOE is not and has a proven track record of controlling nuclear material in far more challenging scenarios than some startups with enough diluted PU for a reactor. Those risks are frankly trivial compared to the ones related to pollution and climate change people are willing to endure because it doesn't tickle their monkey brain with the "nuclear" word.

[bigbadfeline]

> DOE is not and has a proven track record of controlling nuclear material in far more challenging scenarios than some startups with enough diluted PU for a reactor.

Really? In the case of the Apollo affair, also known as NUMEC affair, the DOE lost enough enriched uranium for several nuclear bombs. NUMEC wasn't a big company.

Your statement is backwards. The larger the organization using the material is, the easier it is to control its use. Multiple cases of "some startups" are the opposite of that and a lot harder to control.

> enough diluted PU for a reactor

Diluted PU is chemically separable, no need for fancy centrifuges, "some startup" can easily extract weapons grade material and it doesn't take much to cause irreparable harm to the US.

> Those risks are frankly trivial compared to the ones related to pollution and climate change people are willing to endure because it doesn't tickle their monkey brain with the "nuclear" word.

A rogue nuke can do a lot more damage than pollution, especially in the current political climate. You severely underestimate the difficulties of safeguarding nuclear materials too. Pollution and climate change are several orders of magnitude less risky than willy-nilly distribution of plutonium.

And of course, "monkey brain" is a cheap manipulation attempt.

[EA-3167]

In order:

In 1965. So much has changed since, especially when it comes to accountability and tracking of nuclear material and waste.

Yes in theory, no in practice the attempt to do so would probably require a state sponsor. Now you have US companies transferring PU to a foreign power to turn into weapons grade? For what? The pleasure of ending up in ADX Florence until they die?

It really can't, over a million people die annually from air pollution alone, never mind the billions expected to perish as a result of downstream effects of climate change. Frankly a nuke or two is nothing by comparison, even if this story had anything to do with nuclear weapons...

...WHICH IT DOES NOT.

[bigbadfeline]

> So much has changed since

There's no solid proof that the changes were for the better, but such a proof is absolutely necessary. If anything, we've been recently observing deepening quid pro quo between government and business, at the expense of public interests.

> would probably require a state sponsor

The probability of that is far above zero while it should be practically indistinguishable from it - which is not realistic.

> It really can't, over a million people die annually from air pollution alone, never mind the billions expected to perish as a result of downstream effects of climate change.

It's pretty clear you're looking at the wrong equation. I am all for nuclear power but plutonium is absolutely irrelevant to the plight of pollution and climate.

Nuclear power has to be built slowly with great caution together with renewables in order to exclude Fukushimas, Chernobyls and Three Mile Islands. It's hard as it is even without plutonium in the mix. Much like in the case of rushed AI and data centers, "move fast and break things" is the wrong attitude here.

There's conventional uranium fuel with low enrichment which is hard to separate, it can work as well or better than plutonium for power in civilian installations, the latter isn't necessary, it only adds risk without any benefit compared to uranium.

> Frankly a nuke or two is nothing by comparison,

This is breathtakingly wrong. What follows "a nuke or two" can wipe out 90% of the globe, and the US isn't going to be spared. If you don't understand that, you need to research more.