China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United States

Discussion in 'China' started by Martian, Feb 8, 2014.

  1. Martian

    Martian Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    262
    Location:
    Boston
    China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United States

    The pictures below show three Chinese Type 094 Jin-class SSBNs.

    Each Jin-class SSBN carries 12 JL-2 SLBMs.

    According to Jane's Defence, one JL-2 SLBM can carry 8 MIRVed thermonuclear warheads. (Source: Jane’s Strategic Weapon Systems (Offensive Weapons). September 30, 2012.)

    3 Chinese Jin-class SSBNs x 12 JL-2 SLBMs per SSBN x 8 MIRVs per SLBM = 288 thermonuclear warheads

    This is counter-intuitive, but China can deter the United States by aiming 288 thermonuclear warheads at Russian cities. In an all-out thermonuclear war with the United States, China already knows that American nukes are headed for China. This means China is finished.

    In retaliation, China wipes out 288 Russian cities and towns. Basically, Russia is finished.

    China will leave all Russian nuclear forces untouched. The Russians have a choice to launch all of their ICBMs against the United States. This is important for the war after the nuclear winter. If Russia does not launch all of its ICBMs against the U.S. then the handful of Russians who survive in underground cities will have to face 310 million Americans in an undamaged America.

    The only logical choice is for Russia to launch all of its MIRVed thermonuclear warheads against the U.S. to level the playing field after the nuclear winter. Any launch of Russian nuclear missiles against China is redundant and pointless.

    Since China has mutually assured destruction capability against the United States (by leveraging the Russian thermonuclear arsenal), this means the U.S. cannot pressure China in Asia or the South China Sea.

    From the Bohai Sea or South China Sea, China's three Type 094 Jin-class SSBNs can maintain China's MAD capability against the United States.

    [​IMG]
    Three Chinese Type 094 Jin-class SSBNs seen at dock.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    By counting the launch tubes, it is obvious the Type 094 Jin-class SSBN carries 12 SLBMs.

    [Note: Thank you to ChineseTiger1986 for the pictures.]
     
    W.G.Ewald, Free Karma and Srinivas_K like this.
  2.  
  3. Srinivas_K

    Srinivas_K Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    3,351
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Nuclear weapons are enough for Mutual Assured Destruction. A good MIRV capable missiles will make the enemy in defensive. But USSR was not defeated by Military power.

    Just like China is developing asymmetric weapons, USA also has their strategies pre planned for China or India or any country.

    If China wants MAD USA check mates it with some indirect response strategy.
     
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  4. CCP

    CCP Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    193
    Location:
    school
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    stupid report....
    A picture shows 3 type 094 at the dock, then assume China only have 3 type 094?
     
  5. Martian

    Martian Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    262
    Location:
    Boston
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    China's MAD capability, Diayou Islands, and South China Sea

    Nuclear Coercion

    The ultimate military power is nuclear coercion. We first saw nuclear coercion in the Korean War (1950-1953). At that time, China had not yet detonated its first atomic/fission bomb (1964) or hydrogen/thermonuclear/fusion bomb (1967).

    The United States threatened to use nuclear weapons against China if the PLA Army pushed the US Army into the sea. Thus, the threat of nuclear coercion prevented a complete military victory for China on the Korean peninsula.

    Today, the United States is using nuclear coercion again against China. Basically, the U.S. has more thermonuclear ICBM and SLBM thermonuclear warheads. This means in an all-out exchange, the U.S. will suffer less damage than China. Using this line of thinking, China must be circumspect in dealing with its Asian neighbors due to U.S. support for them.

    To solve the problem of U.S. nuclear coercion, we will take the concept of Chinese nuclear coercion and apply it to Russia. China has plenty of MRBM/IRBM, SLBM, GLCM, and ALCM thermonuclear warheads. The goal is to transform a plentiful supply of medium-range thermonuclear warheads into thousands of long-range ICBM or SLBM thermonuclear warheads.

    In the event of an U.S. nuclear attack on China, China has nothing to lose. Thus, China will unleash hundreds of intermediate-range thermonuclear warheads on Russian cities. China has created a situation where Russia has nothing to lose as well.

    At this point, China and Russia have both lost. The United States is in pretty good shape with some Chinese ICBM retaliation. However, the Russians have to consider the war after the nuclear winter. If the Russians don't nuke the U.S. then the U.S. will rule the world forever.

    Due to Chinese nuclear coercion, Russia has only one rational choice. Russia must nuke the U.S. to give the Russian post-nuclear war survivors an equal chance to win.

    China invokes Russian nuclear umbrella

    The impetus behind China's thermonuclear attack on Russian cities is to force the launch of Russian ICBMs and SLBMs in a retaliatory strike on China's behalf against the United States. This means Russia can avoid an attack on its cities if it agrees beforehand with China to launch the Russian thermonuclear arsenal against the United States if the U.S. attacks China.

    By using nuclear coercion, China can force the Russians to shelter China under the Russian nuclear umbrella. Militarily speaking, the United States must consider China and Russia as joined at the hip. Any nuclear attack on China should be considered as an attack on Russia.

    Overthrowing conventional military strategy


    Currently, it is widely believed that China does not possess sufficient long-range thermonuclear weapons to deter the United States. Using the new strategy of attacking Russian cities, China has acquired access to the Russian thermonuclear arsenal to deter the United States. Effectively, China has acquired Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) capability against the United States.

    The other pillar of conventional military wisdom is that China will sail its Type 094 Jin-class SSBNs eastward into the Pacific to bring parts of the United States within firing range. The Jin-class SSBNs are not as quiet as American subs and China lacks experience in long-range patrols. This is dangerous for China, because 50 American nuclear attack subs are waiting to intercept the Chinese Jin-class SSBNs.

    We can avert the problem of losing the Jin-class SSBNs by launching their SLBMs with 288 MIRVed warheads toward Russian cities and effectively transforming them into thousands of Russian thermonuclear warheads headed for the United States.

    MAD gives China a free hand in Asia


    Previously, without MAD capability, China could not use its full military arsenal to win in the Diaoyu Islands and South China Sea disputes.

    If the United States intervenes militarily over the Diayou Islands, China has two good replies. The first option is to abandon the conventional air and naval battle over the Diayou Islands. The PLA annexes Mongolia and spends ten years to build a second Underground Great Wall about 2,000 miles long to protect about 5,000 thermonuclear warheads on 500 DF-41 ICBMs (which have 10 MIRVs per ICBM).

    The second option is to nullify the entire U.S. Navy and Air Force in Asia with Chinese megaton-class EMP (electromagnetic pulse) weapons. By sending a surge of 50,000 volts per meter through all electronics and electrical wiring, all American naval ships and aircraft within a 3,000-mile diameter would be rendered useless.

    Both options of annexing Mongolia and using megaton-class EMPs are risky without the ability to deter the United States from the ultimate threat of all-out thermonuclear war. By attacking hundreds of Russian cities, China has acquired MAD capability to deter the United States.

    Using the new Chinese MAD capability, China should feel free to annex Mongolia or use megaton-class EMPs whenever it feels like it.
     
  6. CCP

    CCP Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    193
    Location:
    school
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    stupid report again.

    Basically , the" nuclear winter " is just a questionable concept and it is even criticized by Edward Teller.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2014
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  7. prohumanity

    prohumanity Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2013
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    548
    Location:
    USA
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Its one of the most stupid and dumb report I have read. Why would China wipe out Russian cities if attacked by US. This report is from paid think tanks to create fear. A few nuclear missiles on US cities or chinese cities ,can create extreme chaos and warmongers will be in total shock.
    Are you really dumb to believe that anyone can win if the nuclear war starts between any two major countries such as US, China, India or Russia
    World economy will collapse.... radiation will cause cancer in hundreds of millions of people....NO BODY WILL WIN...all will lose including the super-bully.
    And not to mention, to seek revenge..there will be millions of Indian, Chinese or Russian men ("terrorists") to destroy the
    super bully . There is no alternative to peaceful coexistence and end of bullying. Multi-polar world order...folks!
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2014
    raja696 and WuMaoCleverbot like this.
  8. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,543
    Likes Received:
    6,547
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    How can china carryout mad with 26 icbm arsenal out which half being duds?
     
  9. CCP

    CCP Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    193
    Location:
    school
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Are you a trolling machine?
     
  10. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Why will China attach Russia in response to US nuke strike?
     
    raja696 likes this.
  11. Known_Unknown

    Known_Unknown Devil's Advocate Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    2,632
    Likes Received:
    1,664
    Location:
    Earth
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Lol, like others have pointed out, the report is utterly nonsensical. If China nukes Russia, guess what, Russia & US will become the best of friends for the purpose of utterly destroying China. Just like the USSR was hated by most of the western European countries before WWII, but when Nazi Germany attacked both the west and the USSR, they suddenly became the best of chums and ganged up to obliterate Germany.
     
  12. pkroyal

    pkroyal Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2013
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    717
    Location:
    jaipur
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Nobody wins a nuclear war.

    To put a Nation on self destruct / implosion mode there are other methods:-

    Class war( rich vs poor)
    Fanning religious divide / fanaticism.
    Controlling the supply of Oil ( energy ), China has less than 45 days reserve.
    Spread of communicable diseases by dumping germs / bacteria in goods containers being imported by a country.
    Economic strangulation ( boycotting buying of goods produced by a particular country).
    Pre-emptive strike on multiple targets by a coalition of allies at locations where the crown jewels( nuclear war heads) are stashed. Akin to de-fanging before a state becomes rogue or a bully.
     
  13. CCP

    CCP Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    193
    Location:
    school
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2014
  14. hbogyt

    hbogyt Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    11
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Yeah, and China can shale it up too like the US. You better change your argument because the oil supply trick is getting old.
     
  15. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,528
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat


    It's closer?
     
  16. prohumanity

    prohumanity Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2013
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    548
    Location:
    USA
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Yes. Tell me why would China attack Russia. China is signing billions of dollars of trade deals with Russia these days...OIl fields of central asia are being bought by China with Russia's permission. And, Shinzo Abe and Putin are getting friendly and have a "dream" of strong ,independent Japan. Japan is itching to invest billions of dollars in India's infrastructural projects. Do you see the trend? And Brazil is not behind..it has cancelled buying F/18.
    BRICS...BRICS and more BRICS PLUS J...and I ..that means ...BRIICSJ How will the bully divide them if they are falling in love with each other?
     
  17. hbogyt

    hbogyt Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    11
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    I just want to add, OMFG, are you serious? Nukes are not that powerful. They're essentially large bombs. China's arsenal will leave a significant proportion of a great power's infrastructure and population alive.
     
  18. Martian

    Martian Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    262
    Location:
    Boston
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Four different ways for China to attain MAD capability against the U.S.

    It is important to make a distinction between China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) capability against the United States and the actual implementation. The point behind acquiring MAD is to deter the United States and prevent the use of the Doomsday weapons.

    China's MAD capability is not about destroying the United States via the destruction of Russian cities to trigger the Russian thermonuclear arsenal. The strategic goal of China's MAD is to force the United States to go home.

    The Soviet Union/Russia successfully used its thermonuclear arsenal to force the United States to remove its thermonuclear weapons from Turkey during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Russia again successfully used its thermonuclear arsenal to deter the United States when Russia invaded and annexed 20% of Georgian territory in 2008.

    The idea behind the Chinese threat to use 288 thermonuclear warheads (carried by 36 JL-2 SLBMs on three Type 094 Jin-class SSBNs) to wipe out Russian cities is to piggyback on the Russian thermonuclear arsenal. Since China's response to the U.S. threat of Trident II SLBMs is the same as the Russian response in Georgia, China will be able to "stare down" the United States in Asia.

    China's leverage of the Russian thermonuclear arsenal is an indirect MAD. The entire scenario of wiping out all Russian cities and towns is to put the Russians into a box with only one rational choice of counterstriking the Unite States.

    However, there are three other ways for China to achieve MAD capability against the United States.

    -----

    Firstly, as J-20BlackDragon has mentioned, China has the 3,000-mile Underground Great Wall. The problem with the Underground Great Wall is that no one knows how many thermonuclear weapons are down there. Is it hundreds or thousands of thermonuclear warheads on DF-31As? The distinction is crucial. The DF-31A is either 3-MIRVed (according to Jane's Defence) or 6-MIRVed (according to Bill Gertz).

    The low MIRV count on the DF-31A is a problem. With 100 DF-31A ICBMs, China only has 300 to 600 thermonuclear warheads. As a military strategist, we like to be conservative and pick the lower number. You cannot deter the United States with 300 thermonuclear warheads.

    The Pentagon's latest report on Chinese Military Power acknowledges the existence of "enhanced" DF-5 ICBMs. Since 1999, Richard Fisher has been discussing the DF-5B/"enhanced" 10-MIRV ICBM. China probably has about 20-35 DF-5B ICBMs. Using the lower figure, we are looking at another 200 thermonuclear warheads.

    In total, a reasonable estimate is about 500 thermonuclear warheads in the Underground Great Wall. It is possible that China built a lot more DF-31A and DF-5B ICBMs. However, there is no proof. Also, China knew the more capable DF-41 was waiting in the wings. It is logical for China to build a limited number of DF-31A ICBMs and the liquid-fueled DF-5Bs.

    Without more information, the Underground Great Wall is not currently sufficient to deter the United States.

    -----

    Secondly, China can deter the United States with a sufficient number of DF-41 10-MIRVed ICBMs on mobile TELs. It has been 1 1/2 years since the first known successful DF-41 test on July 24, 2012. Assuming China builds 20 DF-41 ICBMs per year (which will probably ramp up to 40 DF-41 ICBMs per year after three to five years due to greater experience), we can conservatively estimate China to have about 30 DF-41 ICBMs. That's 300 thermonuclear warheads.

    Once again, 300 thermonuclear warheads will not give China MAD capability and it is insufficient to deter the United States.

    Collectively, we are looking at 800 Chinese thermonuclear warheads. There might be more due to reload capability (of a second missile) per mobile TEL. However, the United States clearly has the upper hand.

    China can achieve direct MAD capability against the U.S. in about 3.5 years with its mobile DF-41 TELs. When we see pictures of DF-41s being deployed to every Second Artillery battalion then China has achieved MAD against the U.S.

    On July 24 2017, it will have been five years since the first DF-41 launch. Assuming an average production of 30 DF-41 ICBMs per year, that's 150 DF-41 ICBMs in total with 1,500 thermonuclear warheads. We're definitely entering MAD territory.

    -----

    Thirdly, China can achieve MAD with a reasonable number of JL-3 SLBMs. The current JL-2 SLBM doesn't have enough range to threaten the continental United States. The improved JL-2A SLBM with longer range might be able to hit part of the continental United States, but the number of MIRVed warheads will probably go down to allow the JL-2A SLBM to carry more fuel.

    As a new missile variant, the JL-2A SLBM will be produced in limited quantities and the reduced MIRV warhead count weakens its total impact.

    Thus, we have to wait until the JL-3 SLBMs (which are navalized DF-41 10-MIRVed ICBMs) make its debut. Afterwards, we will have to wait a few years until the JL-3 SLBMs are produced in sufficient quantity to deter the United States.

    -----

    In conclusion, it should be apparent that China is on the brink of achieving direct MAD capability against the United States. Within the next five to ten years, China will be able to field sufficient thermonuclear warheads against the United States to force an U.S. retreat from Asia.

    That is why the U.S. is pressuring China now to agree to a code of conduct and attempt to bind China into a legal agreement on the South China Sea. The U.S. won't have this leverage in five to ten years.

    The interesting aspect of China's ability to deter the United States via the Russian thermonuclear arsenal is that it deprives the U.S. of any leverage over China today. Since China can destroy the United States by first destroying Russian cities, China should not give in to American pressure on the South China Sea.
     
  19. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,543
    Likes Received:
    6,547
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    Lot of errors in this article. China does not have 100 icbm's or fissile material for it.
     
  20. CCP

    CCP Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    193
    Location:
    school
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    you are in trolling model.
     
  21. Martian

    Martian Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    262
    Location:
    Boston
    Re: China's Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) against the United Stat

    In the last fifty years, the Soviet Union and the United States have repeatedly threatened China. Do you think the Chinese have multiple operational underground plutonium plants? I think the correct answer is "yes," because China needed secure underground plutonium plants to protect itself from the USSR and the U.S.

    China Opens Vast Underground Nuke Plant to Public

    "China Opens Vast Underground Nuke Plant to Public
    [email protected] / Apr. 29, 2010 11:21 KST

    China has opened the world's largest underground nuclear weapons plant to the public. According to the official China Daily on Tuesday, China opened the plant dubbed the "816 project" in a mountain in Chongqing's Fuling district to tourists recently. It lies in the world's largest man-made cave, which is 20 km deep.

    A 79.6 m-high nine-story building was built in the cave with a total floor area of some 13,000 sq. m. A reactor in the plant produced weapons-grade plutonium 239.

    The entire facility consists of 18 caves, 130 roads, tunnels, mine shafts, and weapons and food storage. It is designed to withstand a magnitude 8 earthquake or a nuclear attack.

    Construction began with approval by then premier Zhou Enlai in 1967. A total of about 60,000 workers were mobilized during the eight-year construction, which cost 740 million yuan.

    [​IMG]
    In this screen-grab from the China Daily website, visitors look at an underground nuclear plant in Chongqing, China on Tuesday. /Courtesy of China Daily

    China decided to build this nuclear facility when relations with the Soviet Union turned sour in the 1960s, but it shut down amid changes in the international situation in 1984. In 2002, Beijing declassified the facility and now the Chongqing city government has opened it to the public.

    But the plant is still under strict control, with soldiers standing guard at the entrance. Tourists are allowed to enter only with permits, the daily reported."

    ----------

    Project 816 - Unfinished plutonium production complex in China

    "Project 816 - Unfinished plutonium production complex in China
    By Pavel Podvig on June 5, 2010 11:39 AM
    Guest contribution by Hui Zhang

    China has been known to have two plutonium production facilities - the Jiuquan and Guangyuan complexes. As it turns out, it built another one - The "816 Nuclear Military Facility" is located near Baitao in Fuling District (the entrance to the facility might be about a kilometer north-east of the village). It had never appeared publicly until April 2010, when China opened it as a tourist attraction. The facility, which was built underground, has never been operational - the project approved in 1966, the construction began in 1967, but the project had not been completed and was terminated in 1984. Later it became part of the Jianfeng Chemical Engineering Plant under China's National Nuclear Corporation.

    [​IMG]
    Entrance to the facility. The sign in Chinese above the tunnel reads "816 Underground Nuclear Project".

    [​IMG]
    Reactor hall

    [​IMG]
    Control room

    The underground complex was planned to have plutonium production reactors, similar to the reactors that were deployed in Jiuquan and Guangyuan. The complex apparently was supposed to host reprocessing and storage facilities as well."

    ----------

    In 1991, China promised to only stop producing plutonium for MILITARY purposes

    The current estimate by the West that China has a maximum of 400 thermonuclear warheads is based on a very flimsy assumption. In 1991, China gave a qualified promise to stop producing plutonium for military purposes.

    This raises an obvious question. Did China keep producing plutonium in its underground plutonium plants (like the one located in Chongqing, see references below) for civilian purposes? If so, China is sitting on a massive stockpile of plutonium and no one knows how many thermonuclear warheads were built by China during the last 21 years (e.g. 1991-2012).

    References:

    China Opens Vast Underground Nuke Plant to Public

    Project 816 - Unfinished plutonium production complex in China

    ----------

    China's Nuclear Ambition Grows

    "China's Nuclear Ambition Grows
    The Risk Report
    Volume 1 Number 9 (November 1995) Page 1
    ...
    U.S. officials estimate that China has roughly 450 nuclear warheads, though China has produced enough weapon-grade uranium and plutonium to build an arsenal more than three times that size. In August, China conducted its 43rd nuclear weapon test. U.S. analysts expect that Beijing will test again this year, and maybe two or three times in 1996 before an international treaty to ban nuclear tests comes into effect.
    ...
    China is believed to have stopped making enriched uranium for military purposes in the late 1980s, and to have stopped producing plutonium for bombs in 1991. But a U.S. government nuclear specialist cautions that China's declarations are "a masterpiece of Chinese-speak; you must listen carefully when they say they have stopped making plutonium for military purposes.'" China continues to enrich uranium for use as reactor fuel, and is building a pilot plutonium extraction plant, scheduled to start by the year 2000. China also may build another large plutonium extraction plant for "commercial" purposes, but Beijing promises that the new facilities will be open to international inspection."

    ----------

    China has two additional sources of plutonium: fast breeder reactor and reprocessed spent fuel

    1. Above-ground plutonium plant - In 1991, China promised to shut down its two above-ground dedicated plutonium plants. This has been confirmed by the absence of smoke from the smokestacks. Everybody agrees on this point.

    2. Underground plutonium plant - What about China's underground plutonium plants? We've all seen the pictures of the massive plutonium facility in Chongqing. Was plutonium produced at the plant? No one knows, except for the Chinese government.

    Did China build other underground plutonium plants? We don't know the answer to that question either. However, if you were China and the Soviets and the Americans had been threatening you with their thermonuclear weapons, would you build more underground plutonium plants?

    3. Fast breeder reactor - China is building fast breeder reactors. We know China has connected a small fast breeder reactor to its power grid. Thus, we know China possesses the technology to build a small civilian fast breeder reactor. If you were the PLA, would you demand that the scientists build a larger underground fast breeder reactor? You need plutonium to build more thermonuclear warheads.

    China

    "China’s Nuclear Scientists Unveil Latest ‘Breakthrough’
    July 21, 2011, 8:38 PM HKT
    ...
    The China Institute of Atomic Energy said Thursday that a small, experimental “fast breeder” reactor outside Beijing had been hooked to the grid to produce electricity. Essentially, the tiny 20 megawatt nuclear plant “863” is now helping satisfy China’s vast power needs.

    To supporters of nuclear power, fast-breeding is alluring. The idea is that it produces more plutonium than the plant needs to run, providing fissionable material usable elsewhere in the nation’s nuclear program. For China, which is long on nuclear ambitions but short on uranium, it’s an especially desirable technology."

    4. Reprocessed spent nuclear fuel - China is believed to have acquired the plutonium to build its first thermonuclear warhead by separating the plutonium from the uranium fuel rods in its civilian nuclear reactors. China has many more and larger nuclear reactors today than in 1967. China has a gigantic supply of readily available plutonium that can be easily reprocessed from their spent uranium fuel.

    China's recent claim of a nuclear-power breakthrough is no piece of (yellow) cake - China Real Time Report - WSJ

    "Nuclear engineers have long had the ability to reprocess uranium after it is used in a reactor to produce power. In the process, plutonium is split from the spent uranium and fed into a reactor to produce more power–or used to make nuclear weapons.

    In fact, China likely obtained the plutonium for its first test of a nuclear weapon in 1964 using a process similar to the one now claimed by China National Nuclear, experts say."

    ----------

    The entire Western estimate of the Chinese thermonuclear arsenal is based strictly on point #1. What about the sources of Chinese plutonium from underground plutonium plants, fast breeder reactors (because we know China has the technology), and reprocessed spent uranium fuel (which is how China separated the plutonium for its first thermonuclear warhead)?

    How much plutonium do you think China possesses from sources #2, #3, and #4? Unless someone can definitively answer points #2, #3, and #4, Western estimates of available Chinese plutonium are a best-case scenario. It is nowhere near the plutonium (and the total Chinese thermonuclear warheads) in a worst-case scenario.

    ----------

    [​IMG]
    "Core height for the China Experimental Fast Reactor is 45 centimeters. It has 150 kilograms of plutonium (98 kg of which is Pu-239)."
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2014

Share This Page