after 1957 a few hundred tons per year would be needed,
Several of
those present commented that this was a more favorable situation than
the one with respect to prahium ores,
Dr. Rabi inguired from Dr, Bradbury what arguments were against
iti
None appeared, Dr. Bradbury said that the strongest argument for —
U-233 was the increased degree of flexibility in weapon design, He
would still advocate the proposal even if a bright idea developed which ,
would greatly reduce the predetonation probability with plutonium,
‘The neutrons were not being thrown away; the added cost is not great;
the weapon design and ore supply advantages are very considerable.
To a question of Dr, Rabi's on possible effects on the Livermore prograu
he saldit wouldive ¢them| another parameter to work with,
8etiampia
“Wats Gonetderation wasalreadyintke’exchange waver”
Mr, Whitman sald it would be a good thing to get a secondraw
material into the program,
He also felt that the reactor program
would probably benefit from this extension of technology.
|
Dr, Libby, who said he had been searching for an objection to
schedule B, observed that it might remove the pressure from developing
the technology of separating Pu-240 from high g/T plutonium.
felt, however, that this was not too Jakely.
It was:
|
Dr, Rabi said his view was that the proposed step may be a.geod
thing but is not tkelyAe be of practicalsignificance in thethermo-,
hs Aaapennieieeh
nuclear program. |
oN CATEiE
in fe
sa Masa Ee
pat -
£, Ma)