What's new

Iranian Chill Thread

Mechanical tests? Seriously? A nuclear centrifuge is a useless piece of junk before it has been tested with gas injected to it. Once they injected gas into it, then I'll accept that they have tested it. Before that, it's nothing more than a prototype and the SWU they report is nothing but a theoretical limit that will never be fulfilled.

IR-1 was supposed to have a SWU of 3, but the reports from the IAEA claim that the best it performed was below 1.5 SWU. And most of the time it worked in the range of 0.8 to 1 SWU.
Did you read the article?! Let me quote it for you because it doesn't look like you did:

"Spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Behrouz Kamalvandi, noted the successful testing of the advanced generation of IR-8 centrifuges by injecting uranium hexafluoride (UF6) into them

The injection of UF6 is a highly important step and it was carried out according to schedule

“the mechanical tests were conducted on the IR-8 centrifuges some three and a half years ago and they were now ready for the next phase, which was the UF6 injection" "

This article was written in January 2017, when he says the mechanical tests happened 3.5 years earlier and that they had now been injected with gas as part of their next stage of testing, exactly as I said earlier.

Natanz is also immune to attack and it is an underground facility as well. Natanz in fact has a higher density of air defenses. The outrage about Fordow was an excuse to put more pressure on Iran. I still don't understand why it's a big move. A big move is to do something you haven't done before. Like enriching uranium to 50%. After all the threats, the Rouhani administration is still enriching uranium at 4.5%, not even the 5% that Rouhani himself spoke of. Are you effing kidding me?
Fordow is built much further underground and is near Qom and was not disclosed by Iran, so those are the 3 reasons Fordow is seen as different to Natanz.

And how do you conclude that smaller size means less manufacturing time? A dustbin is usually bigger than an iPhone but it doesn't mean that manufacturing an iPhone is easier than a dustbin. Does it?
As far as installation is concerned, the S model seen in the photo seems to have a larger diameter but shorter height. So, you can't really say that it takes up less space on and we can install more of them for cascading either. Can you?
If you look at the major change in new centrifuges it is their height. The most advanced Urenco centrifuges are 20m+ tall. I read somewhere in Persian about the S series being built specifically for the ease of manufacture/operation reason, if I find it I will post it.

Yeah. Another blatant lie by Salehi. He said just few days ago that we have enough 20% HALEU but Iran has no reserves of HALEU besides the HALEU that is currently being consumed by the Tehran Research Reactor. We gave up the excess of our HALEU reserves in the JCPOA. The JCPOA clearly and explicitly states that Iran cannot have more than 300 kilograms of 3.5% LEU and the Rouhani administration got rid of the excess as fast as possible when they were "fulfilling" their commitments under the JCPOA in 2015-2016. So, nope. We don't have any HALEU left and once the TRR consumes its fuel, we will be in trouble. The more we wait, the more difficult it gets to produce it later because it will require a larger number of centrifuges spinning.

The 190,000 Kg UF6 SWU is not a "goal". It's the number required for keeping our nuclear facilities running without purchasing uranium from other countries. Unless your definition of a nuclear industry is to enrich uranium only to send it to Russia for their use, then anything that doesn't meet that demand is treason (which is what happened under the JCPOA). If we can't meet the 190,000 Kg UF6 SWU, Bushehr and TRR will have to go offline. And at the current pace, we will be nowhere near our previous 13,000 kg stockpile of uranium anytime soon.
Iran disavowed the 300kg stockpile limit after the 3rd response chapter and now has more than 300kg already I think, so that is wrong.

JCPOA entails limitations, one of those is not to produce 20% enriched uranium and to purchase the needed fuel from abroad instead. That would expire in due course but Iran didn't waive this requirement yet so I guess it's not a problem. If Russia refuses to sell Iran the needed fuel then obviously they would decide to enrich to 20% again, the fact they didn't shows that they don't think it's necessary yet (to me, to you maybe it is gross negligence and treason, maybe you are right but I don't see evidence for that yet).
 
Did you read the article?! Let me quote it for you because it doesn't look like you did:

"Spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Behrouz Kamalvandi, noted the successful testing of the advanced generation of IR-8 centrifuges by injecting uranium hexafluoride (UF6) into them

The injection of UF6 is a highly important step and it was carried out according to schedule

“the mechanical tests were conducted on the IR-8 centrifuges some three and a half years ago and they were now ready for the next phase, which was the UF6 injection" "

This article was written in January 2017, when he says the mechanical tests happened 3.5 years earlier and that they had now been injected with gas as part of their next stage of testing, exactly as I said earlier.
I did check both of the articles and they don't say what you have falsely quoted. Otherwise, correct me if I'm wrong.

What it says is that "A statement issued by the AEOI on 28 January said the injection of UF6 into the centrifuges marked an important step in the country's uranium enrichment research and development. It described the IR-8 as 'one of the most advanced centrifuges designed and built by Iranian scientists'."

That by no means implies that IR-8 was tested by injecting UF6 into it. Do not distort the article.

Fordow is built much further underground and is near Qom and was not disclosed by Iran, so those are the 3 reasons Fordow is seen as different to Natanz.
Fordow was not disclosed by Iran because it had not been finished yet and Iran was under no obligation by the NPT to disclose the existence of Fordow before the building had been constructed completely. Moving an insignificant number of your centrifuges from one enrichment facility to another does not count as a bold move in my dictionary and if Iran comes under attack (which is highly unlikely), it doesn't matter whether they hit Natanz or Fordow because both scenarios result in war. And both sites are immune to conventional bunker busters but not very immune to tactical nukes.


If you look at the major change in new centrifuges it is their height. The most advanced Urenco centrifuges are 20m+ tall. I read somewhere in Persian about the S series being built specifically for the ease of manufacture/operation reason, if I find it I will post it.
Yeah. I noticed their height and I mentioned it in my comment. But I'm not convinced that it makes it easier to manufacture them or host them in large numbers.

Iran disavowed the 300kg stockpile limit after the 3rd response chapter and now has more than 300kg already I think, so that is wrong.

JCPOA entails limitations, one of those is not to produce 20% enriched uranium and to purchase the needed fuel from abroad instead. That would expire in due course but Iran didn't waive this requirement yet so I guess it's not a problem. If Russia refuses to sell Iran the needed fuel then obviously they would decide to enrich to 20% again, the fact they didn't shows that they don't think it's necessary yet (to me, to you maybe it is gross negligence and treason, maybe you are right but I don't see evidence for that yet).
Apples and oranges. Did you even read what I wrote? The 300 kilogram limit was in reference to Salehi's absurd claim that Iran had enough HALEU reserves. We don't have even 1 gram of HALEU reserves anymore. All we had was either converted to nuclear fuel for the TRR or was sold and sent abroad.

More precisely from Wikipedia: ...This is a "major decline" in Iran's previous nuclear activity; prior to watering down its stockpile pursuant to the Joint Plan of Action interim agreement, Iran had enriched uranium to near 20% (medium-enriched uranium).[68][69][70] These enriched uranium in excess of 300 kg of up to 3.67% will be down blended to natural uranium level or be sold in return for natural uranium, and the uranium enriched to between 5% and 20% will be fabricated into fuel plates for the Tehran Research Reactor or sold or diluted to an enrichment level of 3.67%. The implementation of the commercial contracts will be facilitated by P5+1.

It's simple math. And when you do it, you realize that Iran's nuclear program is no longer a real program and it has been halted after signing the JCPOA and the Rouhani administration is very keen on maintaining status quo.
 
I did check both of the articles and they don't say what you have falsely quoted. Otherwise, correct me if I'm wrong.

What it says is that "A statement issued by the AEOI on 28 January said the injection of UF6 into the centrifuges marked an important step in the country's uranium enrichment research and development. It described the IR-8 as 'one of the most advanced centrifuges designed and built by Iranian scientists'."

That by no means implies that IR-8 was tested by injecting UF6 into it. Do not distort the article.
Which of my quotes were false?! They were all direct, unedited quotes.................. Which everyone can see for themselves.

You are being extremely dishonest so there is no point in continuing this conversation. People can read the links I provided and see for themselves if I am giving false quotes. :disagree:
 
Which of my quotes were false?! They were all direct, unedited quotes.................. Which everyone can see for themselves.

You are being extremely dishonest so there is no point in continuing this conversation. People can read the links I provided and see for themselves if I am giving false quotes. :disagree:

This one
"Spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Behrouz Kamalvandi, noted the successful testing of the advanced generation of IR-8 centrifuges by injecting uranium hexafluoride (UF6) into them"

I couldn't find it in any of the two articles you cited. Turns out it was written in bold font and I missed it.

And it's still weird that they have tested IR-8 before testing IR-6 and in January 2017 (before we started reducing our commitments in the JCPOA). And there's no IAEA report on it. It doesn't add up.

Or maybe because you have nothing to add to the conversation and you don't know what you're talking about. So, you'd better remain silent.
 
Last edited:
This one
"Spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Behrouz Kamalvandi, noted the successful testing of the advanced generation of IR-8 centrifuges by injecting uranium hexafluoride (UF6) into them"

I couldn't find it in any of the two articles you cited. Turns out it was written in bold font and I missed it.
[...]
Or maybe because you have nothing to add to the conversation and you don't know what you're talking about. So, you'd better remain silent.
I am amazed by your ability to (reluctantly!) admit you were wrong in the same message as such arrogance. Incredible :)
 
I am amazed by your ability to (reluctantly!) admit you were wrong in the same message as such arrogance. Incredible :)
The same goes to you. You have been proven wrong in the past too, but I never went as far as calling you dishonest for an honest mistake. Your attempt at making a scapegoat of an obvious mistake was cheap.
 
Nuclear tensions are increasing...

France is taking the lead on whether to refer JCPOA to dispute resolution mechanism (which could lead to snapback of sanctions), but for now it seems they still prefer to wait a bit more.

US have said Iran detained an IAEA inspector, but the reality is of course different and Iran is saying she triggered an alarm as she entered and had traces of explosive nitrates so that's why she was denied entry to Natanz, but she was not detained (and has now left Iran I think).

Turquzabad is in the news again with IAEA's latest report making big claims that man-made and natural uranium traces were found at the site and that the IAEA has satellite imagery to prove Iran cleared out the facility shortly after Israel allegedly exposed it:


IAEA are asking for an explanation for the uranium traces and don't seem satisfied with Iran's explanations.

Some recurring themes for anyone who has read Rouhani's memoirs/books about the past negotiations and history of Iran's nuclear programme...
 
Iran says UN inspector had explosive nitrates



:o::o::o::o:o_Oo_Oo_Oo_O


Iran is alleging that a U.N. inspector it blocked from a nuclear site last week had tested positive for explosive nitrates.



He did not elaborate on why he thought the woman had the residue on her, though he said she went to the bathroom while waiting for a secondary screening and apparently removed the material. This happened at Iran's Natanz nuclear facility.



https://news.yahoo.com/latest-iran-says-un-inspector-141045008.html
 
Iran just become third country with most oil in the world with more then 208 billion barrels of oil


EJAVqWAWsAIwHzt.png
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom