A Canadian Fix for the Iran Crisis? Can do, or CANDU?
Guest Editorial by Jim Borynec
' Iran and the USA are involved in a major diplomatic tussle over nuclear technology.
USA claims that Iran is building a bomb while IRAN claims that peaceful nuclear power is their right under article IV of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
For the moment, lets assume that Iran really does want peaceful nuclear power. How can they get it?
To obtain peaceful nuclear power the Iranians will need to build a reactor and obtain fuel for it. The quickest way to get a reactor is to buy it from some friendly country (Russia). Similarly, Iran could simply buy the fuel (enriched uranium) from Russia. However, buying the fuel poses a problem for the Iranians. If the country selling the fuel gets annoyed by Iran (or co-opted by someone else), they can stop selling more fuel to Iran.
Then, when Iran runs out of the existing stockpile of fuel, there is no electricity and the lights go out in Tehran. This is clearly an undesirable outcome for the Iranians.
Fortunately, Iran has good deposits of uranium ore. They could mine it themselves and not be dependent on the good graces of some third party except that ore isn't the same thing as fuel. To obtain fuel, you have to turn the ore into uranium (easy) and turn the uranium into enriched uranium (hard). This is why the Iranians want to have enrichment capability.
It is also where the "catch" comes in. If you can enrich uranium enough to make reactor fuel, it isn't all that hard to enrich it even more to build a bomb. Thus, the americans don't want Iran to obtain enrichment technology.
Luckily there is a way around this catch.
Canadian CANDU reactors operate on natural uranium. Iran could buy a CANDU reactor and use its own natural uranium to supply power independent of third party control.
With natural uranium fuel, there is no need for an enrichment cycle and Iran will have a tougher time building a bomb. Also, CANDU reactors have other nice properties (like improved efficiency and on-power refueling).
A CANDU reactor should meet all of the Iranian's publicly stated ambitions for peaceful nuclear power.
On the other hand, the Canadians were involved in building a (non-CANDU) reactor for India which was used by the Indians to get the bomb in 1974.
It was a nasty shock and it made Canada wary about selling un-protected nuclear technology. Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL) then devoted a lot of attention to designing safeguards ensuring that purchasers of CANDU reactors won't use the technology to build bombs.
These safeguards should meet the Americans and the IAEA's requirements on meeting Iran's obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
A CANDU isn't a silver bullet. The reactor has aging problems like all other nuclear reactors. However, it may be a way to dodge the next war in the Middle East. '
posted by Juan Cole @ 4/18/2006 06:09:00 AM
5 Comments:
Iran would perceive the following problems with installing a Candu reactor:
1 - As susceptible as Russia is to US pressure, and Russia is now delaying the delivery of the M1 missile system because of US pressure, Canada would be worse. Iran would have its own fuel, but what about maintenance? Iran would rather depend on Russia than Canada.
2 - Iran has already sunk about a billion dollars into the Bushehr reactor and would be able to get it on line faster than a Candu reactor starting now. The money issue could be negotiated in theory.
3 - There still is no legal rationale for Iran to disclaim its right to learn how to enrich uranium Iran has every right to learn to do this and to sell enriched uranium internationally to safeguarded facilities of other countries such as Cuba, Venezuela or the other Muslim countries that would have problems getting fuel for a nuclear program from the West. Iran forsees a future where there is a much greater need for fuel by many countries, and it has a duty as an Islamic nation to ensure that later Muslim countries do not face the problems Iran has faced.
4 - The strategic benefits to Iran of being nuclear capable are both real and legal. It is just as valid to force Israel to dismantle its arsenal as it is to force Iran to disclaim being nuclear capable.
Iran's solution, Iran keeps its right to enrich uranium but undergoes a stricter inspection regime than any other country that would make it impossible for Iran to build a weapon in secret and would require about a year for Iran to openly build a bomb if some external crisis requires Iran to leave the NPT is probably going to be the solution we end up with, whether or not the US very stupidly launches a military attack.
I tend to agree with the previous commenter.
If Iran hadn't already built the Bushehr light water reactor, the CANDU option could have been an option, but with all the caveats already mentioned.
Much of Iran's nuclear ambitions (civilian or military) are related to national prestige: owning their own fuel cycle is part of that "can do" approach...
It is beyond obvious that my series on Iran is generally unread. The point of enrichment is to sell fuel, competitively, not to operate some simple national mascot like Sabena, to "fly the flag" in some industry.
I give up.
As a resident of a jurisdiction that uses a great deal of Candu-derived power, I can tell you that there is an ongoing frustration with how expensive and time-consuming the maintenance procedures are for these things. The feeling in Ontario is that this is not what we were told vis-a-vis the reliability of these reactors. Given what Ontarians know now about how much of a hassle it is to maintain Candus, I don't know that we'd rush to recommend them to anyone.
Can anyone explain why Iran has a Heavy water manufacturing facility? It was in the news that tehy are opening the plant this week.
I thought it was only used in CANDU type of reactors? of which Iran has none. Is heavy water required in the making of atomic bombs?
Post a Comment
<< Home