[NukeNet] New nuke plans are up in the air

[Will Parrish]

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-nuke23jan23,1,43
53266.story?coll=la-news-a_section
New nuke plans are up in the air


A joint effort by two nuclear labs to design the new warhead has yet to
advance.

By Ralph Vartabedian, Times Staff Writer
January 23, 2007 

 

An effort to design the nation's first new nuclear bomb in two decades
has run into delays, as top experts question whether a bureaucratic
compromise could hamper the new weapon's effectiveness. 

The Bush administration was expected to select a winning design from two
proposals in late November, but officials put off a decision and began
considering whether competing teams at two national laboratories could
collaborate in a joint effort.

Since then, senior officials of the labs in New Mexico and California
have met but not reached an agreement, according to lab officials and a
senior official at the U.S. Strategic Command, the defense agency that
operates the nation's strategic forces. 



Over the last year, Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos national labs have
developed designs for the new bomb, known as the reliable replacement
warhead. As its name implies, the weapon is supposed to be so reliable
that it will not require any underground testing. 

A winner was to have been chosen by defense and energy officials in the
Nuclear Weapons Council, but by November the selection process had grown
complicated and conflicted. The Strategic Command official said defense
officials had judged both designs as meeting military requirements. 

But as Energy Department officials examined the two proposals, they grew
increasingly concerned about the political effect of a decision. 

Both labs, Los Alamos in New Mexico and Livermore in Northern
California, have always had strong backing by their states' delegations
in Congress. What's more, the power shift in Congress put Bay Area
Democrats in the leadership on nuclear weapons issues in January.

Livermore had submitted a conservative design that the council judged
highly attractive. It was based on an 1980s-era warhead that was tested
but then removed from further development. But the new warhead is
intended for Navy missiles, and Livermore has not worked with the Navy. 

The Los Alamos design also had proponents. But if the award went to New
Mexico, Livermore would be left with little on its plate. The Energy
Department might have difficulty justifying the expense of two major
nuclear laboratories. 

To solve those political and organizational problems, the Energy
Department, through its National Nuclear Security Administration, sought
to explore whether the labs could produce a joint design, Strategic
Command officials said. 

A letter to the directors of Los Alamos and Livermore asked them to
explore a collaborative approach.

No formal decision has been made, however.

"It is still in the works," said Sidney Drell, a Stanford University
scientist who has long advised the Energy Department on weapons issues.
"People haven't converged on anything."

Meanwhile, other outside advisors, including a scientific board known as
the JASON group that consists of top academics from across the nation,
are worried about a joint design. The group met earlier this month in La
Jolla, but decided it did not have enough technical information to
endorse a collaborative approach, according to a member of the group.

Scientists are concerned that a design that mixes and matches pieces of
different weapons will undermine the confidence of national leaders in
the reliability of the weapon.

"I have heard concerns in the technical community that this is risky,
but others say it will work," the Strategic Command official said. "It
is a mixed opinion."

 

 

Will Parrish

Youth Empowerment Director

Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

PMB 121, 1187 Coast Village Road, Suite 1

Santa Barbara, CA 93108

wparrish at napf.org

Phone: (805) 965-3443; Fax: (805) 568-0466

www.wagingpeace.org/youth; www.ucnuclearfree.org;
www.thinkoutsidethebomb.org

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/nukenet_energyjustice.net/attachments/20070123/881b548a/attachment.html