Bulletin 286: Demonstration and workshops Nov. 5 in Santa Fe; LANL estimates $18 billion in pit costs this decade, ≥$80 million/pit

October 28, 2021

Permalink for this bulletin. Please forward! 
New home page (previous home page); Press Releases; Bulletins; Letters; plutonium pit production
To subscribe to our local letters listserve send a blank email here. To unsubscribe send a blank email here.
To subscribe to this, our main listserve send a blank email here. To unsubscribe send a blank email here.

No matter where you are, please endorse the "Call for Sanity, Not Nuclear Production."

Contribute. Volunteer. Contact us.

Previously: Bulletin 285: NNSA: LANL pits critical for new warhead; full page ads; why LANL can't make enough pits; join us in Santa Fe Sep 30, Sep 22, 2021

(Some of you encountered a large file when you accessed our full page ad/fact sheet as published in the Albuquerque Journal. That file has since been replaced with a smaller one at the same link. The best version of that fact sheet was published across two pages in the Santa Fe Reporter on Sept. 22 and 29.)

This Bulletin:

• Recent work, possibly useful, on plutonium warhead cores ("pits") and New Mexico climate policy
• November 5 demonstration, workshops, press conference
• LANL estimates its pit production costs will reach $18 billion this decade

Dear friends and colleagues --

My apologies for the delay in this Bulletin. There has been a lot going on. (We've been in closer touch on our New Mexico mailing list. Those of you who are interested might wish to peruse our "local letters" page or sign up to that list by sending a blank email here. Much of the content is of national interest.)

We are pleased to say that our recent 20,000-piece mailing/door-to-door campaign, 5 full-page ads, 4 billboards, and two recent public meetings are beginning to bear fruit. Will liberals, arms controllers, academics, and House Democrats wake up to the folly of building two new Rocky Flats successors before, say, the U.S. military does? It's a tough question. The smart money says no.

Recent work, possibly useful, on plutonium warhead cores ("pits") and New Mexico climate policy

You may be interested in some recent products, starting with this opinion piece, published in the Aiken Standard, Albuquerque Journal, and in slightly longer form, the Los Alamos Reporter ("How deep a ‘pit’ will Biden dig at LANL?") which concludes:

The new Administration inherited Gordon-Hagerty’s folly. What will they do?

The obvious answer, which down the road could have bipartisan support, is to limit LANL’s role to process prove-in and training, or at most to single-shift operations, on the order of 10 pits per year. Such a step could cut the overall program cost nearly in half while still meeting the 80 pit per year goal no later than the current plan.

The benefits to LANL — which would then remain a laboratory, as opposed to a lab and a production agency, would be significant. Benefits to County residents are too many and too obvious to list.

The spirited effort LANL management has been making to enable this mission is noteworthy. The wiser course of action, as soon as the vast scale of effort needed to meet program goals became apparent, would have been to pick up the phone and say, “No.”

We have posted as much as we could record of a recent Study Group public meeting (slides: "LANL pit production: fifth failure in progress," video).

The U.S. failure to respond to the climate crisis is politically and institutionally linked to militarism and imperialism. For example, there can be no cooperation with China or Russia on climate while conducting a new Cold War. And in this new Cold War, it is the U.S. and NATO which are the main aggressors.

Our most recent full-page ads concerned our state's failing response to global warming as well as our state's overall passivity in the face of the nuclear cartel ("Will energy monopolies & the nuclear cartel control NM's future?" Oct. 24, Santa Fe New Mexican and in a slightly smaller format on Oct. 20 in the Santa Fe Reporter). Our converging crises cannot be addressed separately any longer.

Our concerns were magnified by our attendance at a climate conference organized by the Speaker of the (New Mexico) House, our Governor, and others. It was the worst conference Trish and I had ever attended, in intellectual content (very shallow), atmosphere (sycophantic, ideological, partisan), and process (no questions whatsoever allowed). There were a few candles in the gloom in the form of advocates for the poor, who were offered the usual vague policy promises and possible small grants to address their huge challenges, with partisan loyalty strings attached. The ads above express our policy concerns.

On a national as well as a state basis in New Mexico, many currently-popular climate responses will hurt the poor without helping the climate. In fact some of them will increase greenhouse gas production -- at least until economic and social collapse (or nuclear war). Somehow our policy mavens have forgotten that everything built has an energy cost (often large) and that everything is made of actual materials (many in limited supply). Cavalier assumptions are being made, which will come to roost on the backs of the poor and vulnerable here and in the global South.

We will discuss this further on November 5.

November 5 demonstration, workshops, press conference

As outlined in recent local letters (here, plans updated here) we will be hosting a demonstration at the State Capitol on November 5 at noon, concluding around 5 pm. This will be outdoors so if you are planning to come please dress warmly. Wear a mask and bring your own food and drink. We will be sending regular updates to the local letter list so get on that list (see above) if you want to see the evolving agenda, coming soon. Also: we do need help, with outreach especially.

LANL estimates its pit production costs will reach $18 billion this decade

Impeccable sources tell us LANL has estimated its costs for pit production over the FY20-FY30 decade at $18 billion, not including other plutonium programs. This exceeds our high-end cost estimate (here, details here) by some $3.7 billion. LANL pit production evidently requires a greater preparatory work than we have understood.

Greater cost does not imply greater production. Reliable sources tell us LANL is still not expected to exceed a production rate of "30 pits per year" (ppy), which may or may not imply an average production rate of 41 ppy (p. 13), assuming there are no "currently unanticipated, long-term disruptions."

Dividing LANL's estimated costs by 30 or 41 ppy gives per-pit costs of $99 million or $80 million respectively, for pits produced in the '20s. Our previous analysis resulted in per pit costs over this period of $79 million and $64 million, respectively, for these two production rates.

In our August estimates, we could not find a set of realistic cost assumptions under which LANL could produce pits, over any time period, for less than about $50 million apiece. This new information supports that figure as a realistic minimum through the 2030s, and increases it in the 2020s and early 2030s.

For comparison's sake, GAO recently estimated the total cost for each W87-1 warhead at $15.6 million or less, including new pits, which NNSA estimated would cost between $0.3 million and $0.8 million apiece. LANL's startup costs were not included, which GAO naively took to be $3 billion (p. 22).

Thus, using LANL pits in the W87-1 will increase the cost of that warhead by a factor of anywhere from 4 to 7. This is a staggering cost overrun. As long as pits are required -- and alas, our national authorities do want them, badly -- LANL's pit production role should be limited to "process prove-in and training, or at most to single-shift operations, on the order of 10 pits per year" as we said in the Los Alamos Reporter.

That's it for today. Look for more soon.

Best wishes,

Greg and Trish