Evening star., 1954-01-02
Atomic 'Denoturing'

The French newspaper Paris PresSe has not
scored scoop in reporting that American
scientists have figured out how to "denature"
fashionable materials (uranium-235 and plu-
tonium) to make them unuseable for weapons
while at the same time keeping them effective
for such non military purposes as the produc-
ton of industrial atomic power.
This actually is an old story. 1t dates back
to the early months of 1916 when group of
experts headed by Dean Acheson and David E.
Lilienthal-who were then, respectively, Under
secretary Of State and Chairman of the Ten
nessee Valley Authority - drafted a historic
report outlining the essentials Of a program for
strict international control of atomic energy.
The report-which won big headlines at the
time and which paved the way for the so-called
Baruch Plan later submitted to the United
Nations and rejected by the Russians-spoke as
follows on the subject of "denaturing'
U-235 and plutonium can be denatured;
such denatured materials do not readily lend
themselves to the making of atomic explo-
SiveS, but they can still be used with no essen
tial loss of effectiveness for the peaceful ap-
plicationS of atomic energy. i. It is important
to understand the sense in which denaturlng
renders material safer. In the hrSt place, IL
will make the material unuseable by any
methods we now know for effective atomic ex-
plosiveS unless steps are taken to remove the
denaturants In the second place, the devel-
opment of more ingenious methods in the held
of atomic explosives which might make this
material effectively useable Is not only dubi-
Gus, but is certainly not possible without
very major scientific and technical effort.
It is possible . to remove the denatur-
ant, but doing so calls for rather complex
installations which, though not of the scale of
those at Oak Ridge or Hanford, nevertheless
will require large effort. 1t is not without
Importance to bear in mind that, although
as the art now stands denatured materials are
unsuitable for bomb manufacture develop
ments which do not appear to be in principle
impossible might alter the situation. This is
a good example of the need for constant re-
consideration of the dividing line between
what is safe and what is dangerous. We would,
however, propose as criterion that inStalla-
tions using material both denatured and in
sufficient in quantity for the manufacture Of
bombs could be regarded as safe, provided the
installations did not themselves make large
quantities of suitable material
Thus, it has long been matter Of public
record that our experts know how to "dena-
ture" pure nuclear fuels. But what is not yet a
matter of public record is an official answer to
the question whether or not developments since
1946 have changed the findings of the Acheson-
Lilienthal repOrt-that is to say, whether they
have made the "denaturing" process more effec-
tive or less effective today than six or seven
years ago. AS to that, however, it seems signi-
brated December speech proposing the crea-
ton OF an international atomic pool for peace
full purposes, has declared that the ingenuity
of our scientists will provide special safe condi-
tions under which such bank Of fashionable