Talk:Enriched uranium

message: I'm making an artical stub for the United States Enrichment Corpoation ( USEC ) that will link here.
:Quinobi 20:14, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: I am moving this topic to Isotope separation where I think it will make a bit more sense when one sees it in context. DV8 2XL 02:35, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  SWU (separative work unit) 

message: Would be nice if someone could add a reference about which countries uses this technology. thks
Is this the place to express my surprise that North Korea doesn't seem to be referenced? I am not a specialist, just a general reader and am not too familiar with the system, so apologies if I am treading on any toes here. Dawright12 (talk) 11:55, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Countries

message: I don't believe the caption on the "Low-enriched uranium powder" photo is correct. Uranium oxide is that nice yellow colour, but LEU is a metal; that's just a bucket of yellowcake. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 13:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but the HEU picture actually is of an HEU billet, so it is worth pointing that out in the HEU, even if it looks the same as regular uranium metal. Better to give more information than less. --Fastfission 13:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: LEU caption wrong, surely?

message: "Enrichment of Uranium should redirect to this page.  N i g h t F a l c o n 9  0 9  0 9' T a l k 18:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: Got a couple of claims here from anti-nuclear activist Helen Caldicott that  "the [Department of Energy] and the EPA [will tell you] that, at the moment, the process of uranium enrichment for fuel for nuclear power releases huge quantities of CO2. ... Meanwhile, the enrichment of uranium is responsible for [over 90 percent] of the CFC-114 gas released into the air in the U.S. ... CFC gas is 10,000 to 20,000 times more potent as a global warmer and heat trapper than CO2." (brackets in original) -- http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2005/05/03/dicum-caldicott/ -- Can anybody confirm or deny these assertions?  --  Writtenonsand 23:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uranium enrichment as contributor to global warming? 

message: Argentina doesn't have an enriched uranium production at commercial levels.  In fact, all Argentina's reactors are of CANDU type, using natural uranium as its fuel.Agre22 (talk) 14:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Argentina does have a safeguarded gaseous diffusion enrichment plant at Plicaniiyeu, which is shut down. NPguy (talk) 03:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pilcaniyeu plant was reopened on 2010   --Jor70 (talk) 03:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Argentina

message: Care should be taken with the information that a viable commercial process has been developed with respect to Enriched_uranium#Separation_of_Isotopes_by_Laser_Excitation_.28SILEX.29. The source, The New York Times, is notorious for its close relationship with United States intelligence agencies. The source itself says that no independent verification is possible. It is quite possible the story is a fabrication. User:Fred Bauder Talk 17:20, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Enriched_uranium#Separation_of_Isotopes_by_Laser_Excitation_.28SILEX.29

message: An editor recently added a section on "Contamination as a result of the 2006 Lebanon War."  This section makes the claim that:
:Soil and water samples were collected from Khiam in the aftermath of the 2006 Lebanon War. Of 15 samples, two contained high levels of undepleted uranium and four samples contained low-enriched uranium.
citing the source Evidence of Enriched Uranium in Guided Weapons Employed by the Israeli Military in Lebanon in July 2006, by C. Busby and D. Williams.  The paper itself is suspect, as it claims uranium isotopic ratios only slightly above natural and describes (but does not contain) a statistical analysis showing that this difference is significant even though the analyses of some of the quality control samples show similar deviations from the expected isotopic ratios.  Furthermore, the paper has been debunked by this report and is not supported by this UN assessment.
Based on this, I conclude that the claim is not reliable and will delete this new section. NPguy (talk) 15:20, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious claim of enriched uranium use in Lebanon 

message: The article gives the following in the definition of SWUs.  The link it gives for value functions is not helpful in understanding this.
:V(x) = (1 - 2x)  \ln \left(\frac{1 - x}{x}\right)
Someone told me this is a "separation potential" in chemistry.  I really have no idea what leads to this equation, I think it would be valuable for the article.  Can anyone help? Alan Rominger (talk) 22:26, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where does the  

message: LEU is 3-19.75% Not 3-4% As it currently appears in the graphic.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toyotabedzrock (talk • contribs) 20:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand how this could be considered propaganda.  It is merely an illustration of the most common forms of uranium in use.  If you have a different proposal for this graphic, please explain. NPguy (talk) 17:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: The Main Article Graphic Appears To Be Designed For Propaganda Purposes

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:HEUraniumC.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 19, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-12-19. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng  {chat} 17:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:HEUraniumC.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: Enriched uranium is a product - the German translation is "angereichertes Uran". Enrichment ist the process - the German translation is "Anreicherung" - this is the difference. --Fmrauch (talk) 18:27, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Translations 

message: "Highly enriched uranium (HEU) has a greater than 20% concentration of 235U or 233U".
This is WRONG for U-233 but correct for U-235.  The LEU-HEU boundary is at about 11% to 12% for U-233.  I am researching it and will get back to this page if I find an exact figure.
Actually, it should read "greater than or equal to" since the highest concentration of LEU for U-235 is considered to be 19.875%.
Tyrerj (talk) 07:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, this is not correct either.  The Oak Ridge paper cited above makes the argument that HEU should be defined in this way, but the only established definition of HEU is uranium with 20% or more U-235.  See the IAEA Safeguards Glossary.  There is no established definition involving U-233 composition, in large part because U-233 is produced not by enrichment but by irradiation of thorium. NPguy (talk) 19:58, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  HEU 

message: Could we say what % enrichment HEU is used in US military reactors eg in submarines and aircraft carriers ? It seems the NERVA reactors for rocket engines used 100% U-235 (Is it still called HEU?). - Rod57 (talk) 14:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could we say what % enrichment HEU is used in US military reactors eg subs and aircraft carriers 

message: — Assignment last updated by Bennyboo3 (talk) 00:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Cold War Science