Abstract
Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties between the Soviet Union and the United States led to the need to dismantle many nuclear weapons and to dispose of the nuclear material to minimize security risks. This trend was magnified after the dissolution of the Soviet Union because Russia and the United States have undertaken even deeper reductions in tactical nuclear weapons under reciprocal unilateral initiatives. There are between 10 to 20 thousand excess warheads in the U.S., and at least a similar number in the former Soviet Union, containing well over 100 metric tons of plutonium (Holdren, et al., 1995), one of the most toxic and persistent materials known. Major concerns are to minimize the risk that plutonium could be used by terrorists, to minimize the risk that plutonium could be reintroduced into arsenals, and to strengthen arms control to assure continued arms reductions and to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Butler, J, Jia, J. and Dyer, J. Simulation Techniques for the Sensitivity Analysis of Multi-criteria Decision Models. European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 103, no. 3, 1997, 531–546.
DOE-ROD 97 Record of Decision for the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. United States Department of Energy; Office of Fissile Materials Disposition, January 14, 1997.
DOE-SCR 95 Summary Report of the Screening Process to Determine Reasonable Alternatives for Storage and Disposition of Weaponsusable Fissile Materials, DOE/MD-0002. United States Department of Energy; Office of Fissile Materials Disposition, March 17, 1995.
Drezner, J. A. An Analysis of Weapon System Cost Growth. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 1993.
Dyer, J., Edmunds, T., Butler, J. C, and Jia J. Evaluation of Alternatives for the Disposition of Surplus Weapons-usable Plutonium. Amarillo National Resource Center for Plutonium Technical Paper 1997–1. http://www.pu.org/main/reports/reports.html
Dyer, J., Edmunds, T., Butler, J.C., and Jia, J. A multiattribute utility analysis of alternatives for the disposition of surplus weapons-grade plutonium. Operations Research vol. 46, no. 6, 1998, 749–762.
Garwin, R.L. Options and Choices in the Disposition of Excess Weapon Plutonium. Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings, vol. 412,1996,3–13.
Holdren, J. P., Ahearne, J. F., Budnitz, R. J., Garwin, R. L., May, M. M., Pigford, T. H. and Taylor, J. J. Management and Disposition of Excess Weapons Plutonium: Reactor-Related Options, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D. C, 1995.
Merrow, E.W. Understanding the Outcome o/Megaprojects: A Quantitative Analysis of Very Large Civilian Projects. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 1988.
OFMD. Summary Report of the Screening Process to Determine Reasonable Alternatives for Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials. Final Draft dated March 17, 1995, Washington, D. C.
Weber, M. and Borcherding, K. Behavioral Influences on Weight Judgments in Multiattribute Decision Making. European Journal of Operational Research, 67, 1993, 1–11.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Larichev, O.I., Olson, D.L. (2001). Analysis of Alternative Methods to Dispose of Plutonium. In: Multiple Criteria Analysis in Strategic Siting Problems. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3245-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3245-0_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-4899-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-3245-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive