http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/040606M.shtml
Bush Administration Unveils Nuclear Weapons Complex Blueprint
By Ralph Vartabedian
The Los Angeles Times
Thursday 06 April 2006
The administration's proposal would modernize the nation's
complex of laboratories and factories as well as produce new bombs.
The Bush administration on Wednesday unveiled a blueprint for
rebuilding the United States' decrepit nuclear weapons complex,
including restoration of a large-scale bomb manufacturing capacity.
The plan calls for the most sweeping realignment and
modernization of the nation's massive system of laboratories and
factories for nuclear bombs since the end of the Cold War.
Until now, the nation has depended on carefully maintaining aging
bombs produced during the Cold War arms race, some several decades
old. The administration, however, wants the capability to turn out
125 new nuclear bombs per year by 2022, as the Pentagon retires older
bombs that it claims will no longer be reliable or safe.
Under the plan, all of the nation's plutonium would be
consolidated into a single facility that could be more effectively
and cheaply defended against possible terrorist attacks. The plan
would remove the plutonium now kept at Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory by 2014, though transfers of the material could start
sooner. In recent years, concern has sharply grown that Livermore,
surrounded by residential neighborhoods, could not repel a terrorist
attack.
But the administration blueprint is facing sharp criticism, both
from those who say it does not move fast enough to consolidate
plutonium stores and from those who say restarting bomb production
will encourage aspiring nuclear powers across the globe to develop
weapons.
The plan was outlined to Congress on Wednesday by Thomas
D'Agostino, head of nuclear weapons programs at the National Nuclear
Security Administration, a part of the Energy Department. While the
weapons proposal would restore the capacity to make new bombs,
D'Agostino said it is part of a larger effort to accelerate the
dismantling of aging bombs left from the Cold War.
D'Agostino acknowledged in an interview that the Administration
is walking a fine line by modernizing the U.S. nuclear weapons
program while assuring other nations that it is not seeking a new
arms race. The credibility of the argument rests on the U.S. intent
to sharply reduce its overall inventory of weapons.
The administration is also moving quickly ahead with a new
nuclear bomb program known as the "reliable replacement warhead,"
which began last year. Originally described as an effort to update
existing weapons and make them inherently more reliable, it has been
broadened and now includes the potential for new bomb designs.
Weapons labs currently are engaged in a design competition.
The U.S. built its last nuclear weapon in 1989 and last tested a
weapon underground in 1992. Since the Cold War, the U.S. has depended
on massive stockpiles of nuclear weapons to deter attacks. By
contrast, it would now increasingly rely on the capability to build
future bombs for deterrence, D'Agostino said.
The blueprint calls for a modern complex to design a new nuclear
bomb and have it ready in less than four years, allowing the nation
to respond to changing military requirements. Such proposals in the
past, such as for a nuclear bomb to attack underground bunkers,
provoked concern that they undermine U.S. policy to stop nuclear
proliferation.
The impetus for the plan is a growing recognition that efforts to
maintain older nuclear bombs and keep up a large nuclear weapons
industrial complex are technically and financially unsustainable.
Last year, a task force led by San Diego physicist David Overskei
recommended that the Energy Department consolidate the system of
eight existing weapons complexes into a single site.
Overskei said Wednesday that the cost of security alone for the
current infrastructure of plants over the next two decades is roughly
$25 billion. Security costs have grown, because the Sept. 11 attacks
have forced the Energy Department to assume terrorists could mount a
larger and better armed strike force.
Peter Stockton, a former Energy Department security consultant
and now an investigator for the Project on Government Oversight,
criticized the plutonium consolidation plan in House testimony,
saying it delays the difficult work too far into the future. Stockton
added in an interview that the plutonium transfer at Livermore could
be accomplished in a few months.
Until now, Livermore lab officials have sharply disagreed with
the idea of removing plutonium from their site, saying it was
essential to their work. On Wednesday, a lab spokesman said the issue
is "far less controversial" and the "decision rests in Washington."
The Bush plan, described at a hearing of the strategic
subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee, would consolidate
much of the weapons capacity, but not as completely or quickly as
outside critics would like.
The overall plan would not be fully implemented until 2030. A
critical part of restarting U.S. nuclear bomb production involves
so-called plutonium pits, hollow spheres surrounded by high
explosives. The pits start nuclear fission and trigger the nuclear
fusion in a bomb.
The plutonium pits were built at the Energy Department's former
Rocky Flats site near Denver, until the weapons plant was shut down
in 1989 after it violated major environmental regulations.In recent
years, Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico has attempted to
start limited production of plutonium pits and hopes to build a
certified pit that will enter the so-called "war reserve" next year.
Los Alamos would be producing about 30 to 50 pits per year by 2012,
but the Energy Department said that is not enough to sustain the U.S.
nuclear deterrent.
In his testimony, D'Agostino estimated plutonium pits would last
only 45 to 60 years, after which they would be too unreliable and
might result in an explosion smaller than intended. Critics outside
the government sharply dispute that conclusion, saying there is no
evidence that pits degrade over time and that the nation can maintain
an adequate nuclear deterrent by carefully maintaining its existing
weapons.
--------------------------------------------------------
Escaping the Matrix website http://escapingthematrix.org/
cyberjournal website http://cyberjournal.org
blog: cyberjournal forum http://cyberjournal-rkm.blogspot.com/
blog: Achieving real democracy http://harmonization.blogspot.com/
blog: for readers of ETM http://matrixreaders.blogspot.com/
blog: Community Empowerment http://empowermentinitiatives.blogspot.com/
Blogger made easy http://quaylargo.com/help/ezblogger.html
subscribe cyberjournal list mailto:•••@••.•••
Posting archives
http://cyberjournal.org/show_archives/?lists=newslog
--
============================================================
If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website
(http://cyberjournal.org) or try out our low-traffic, moderated email
list by sending a message to:
•••@••.•••
You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website,
provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source.
Richard Moore (rkm)
Wexford, Ireland
"Apocalypse Now and the Brave New World"
http://www.cyberjournal.org/cj/rkm/Apocalypse_and_NWO.html
List archives:
http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog
_____________________________
There is not a problem with the system.
The system is the problem.
Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs.
_____________________________
Informative links:
http://www.indymedia.org/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/
http://www.greenleft.org.au/index.htm
http://www.MiddleEast.org
http://www.rachel.org
http://www.truthout.org
http://www.williambowles.info/monthly_index/
http://www.zmag.org
http://www.co-intelligence.org
============================================================
