What's At Stake?

New Nuclear Weapon Still Needs to be Stopped!

What's At Stake?
Oppose New Nuclear Weapons Today

The Bush Administration has again requested funding from Congress to research a new type of nuclear bomb. The Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) is a nuclear weapon that would burrow a few yards into rock or concrete before exploding and thus generate a powerful underground shock wave. Its hypothetical targets are deeply buried command bunkers or underground storage sites containing chemical or biological agents.

The RNEP Budget:
RNEP is not just a feasibility study: the Department of Energy's 2005 budget included a five-year projection--totaling $484.7 million--for the weapons laboratories to produce a completed warhead design and begin production engineering by 2009. Last year, Representative David Hobson, the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, eliminated funding for the program, stating, "we cannot advocate for nuclear nonproliferation around the globe, while pursuing more usable nuclear weapons options here at home." However, for next year, the Bush administration requested $4 million for RNEP and an additional $4.5 million to modify the B-2 bomber to carry the weapon. In May, the House again rejected funding for the RNEP, but the Senate has tentatively approved it. However, in the next week, the Senate may again vote on an amendment to eliminate funding for the RNEP.

The RNEP Design:
Weapons designers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory intend to use an existing high-yield nuclear warhead--the 1.2-megaton B83 nuclear bomb--in a longer, harder and heavier bomb casing. The B83 is the largest nuclear weapon in the U.S. arsenal, and nearly 100 times more powerful than the nuclear bomb used on Hiroshima.

Technical Realities:
According to several recent scientific studies, including an April 2005 study by the National Academy of Sciences, RNEP would not be effective at destroying many underground targets, and its use could result in the death of millions of people.

To illustrate the problems of the RNEP, the Union of Concerned Scientists has produced an animation that shows both the weapon's technical shortcomings and the consequences of its use.

RNEP would produce tremendous radioactive fallout:
A nuclear earth penetrator cannot penetrate deep enough to contain the radioactive fallout it produces. Even the strongest bomb casing will crush itself by the time it penetrates 30 feet into rock or concrete. But to contain the yield of even just a one-kiloton nuclear warhead (less than 1/10th as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb), the bomb must have burrowedat least 200-300 feet. The high-yield RNEP, 1000 times larger, will produce tremendous fallout that will drift for more than a thousand miles downwind. As, Linton Brooks, the head of the National Nuclear Security Administration told Congress in April, "the laws of physics will [never result in a bomb penetrating] far enough to trap all fallout. This is a nuclear weapon that is going to be hugely destructive over a large area" if it goes off underground.

RNEP could kill millions of people:
UsModeling software developed for the Pentagon to simulate the use of RNEP against Iran shows that 3 million people would be killed by radiation within 2 weeks of the explosion. Another 35 million people in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India would be exposed to increased levels of cancer-causing radiation.

RNEP would not be effective at destroying chemical or biological agents:
Unless the weapon detonates nearly in the same room with the agents, it will not destroy them. Because the United States is unlikely to know the precise location, size and geometry of underground bunkers, a nuclear attack on a storage bunker containing chemical or biological agents would more likely spread those agents into the environment, along with the radioactive fallout.

RNEP would not be effective at destroying deep or widely separated bunkers:
The seismic shock produced by the RNEP would only be able to destroy bunkers to a depth of about a thousand feet. Modern bunkers can be deeper than that, with a widely separated complex of connected rooms and tunnels.

There are more effective conventional alternatives to RNEP:
Current precision-guided conventional weapons can be used to cut off a bunker's communications, power, and air, effectively keeping the enemy weapons underground and unusable until U.S. forces secure them. Sealing chemical or biological agents underground is far more sensible than trying to blow them up.

Go Back


	What's At Stake? New Nuclear Weapon Still Needs to be Stopped! What's At Stake? Oppose New Nuclear Weapons Today The Bush Administration has again requested funding from Congress to research a new type of nuclear bomb. The Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) is a nuclear weapon that would burrow a few yards into rock or concrete before exploding and thus generate a powerful underground shock wave. Its hypothetical targets are deeply buried command bunkers or underground storage sites containing chemical or biological agents. The RNEP Budget: RNEP is not just a feasibility study: the Department of Energy's 2005 budget included a five-year projection--totaling $484.7 million--for the weapons laboratories to produce a completed warhead design and begin production engineering by 2009. Last year, Representative David Hobson, the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, eliminated funding for the program, stating, "we cannot advocate for nuclear nonproliferation around the globe, while pursuing more usable nuclear weapons options here at home." However, for next year, the Bush administration requested $4 million for RNEP and an additional $4.5 million to modify the B-2 bomber to carry the weapon. In May, the House again rejected funding for the RNEP, but the Senate has tentatively approved it. However, in the next week, the Senate may again vote on an amendment to eliminate funding for the RNEP. The RNEP Design: Weapons designers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory intend to use an existing high-yield nuclear warhead--the 1.2-megaton B83 nuclear bomb--in a longer, harder and heavier bomb casing. The B83 is the largest nuclear weapon in the U.S. arsenal, and nearly 100 times more powerful than the nuclear bomb used on Hiroshima. Technical Realities: According to several recent scientific studies, including an April 2005 study by the National Academy of Sciences, RNEP would not be effective at destroying many underground targets, and its use could result in the death of millions of people. To illustrate the problems of the RNEP, the Union of Concerned Scientists has produced an animation that shows both the weapon's technical shortcomings and the consequences of its use. RNEP would produce tremendous radioactive fallout: A nuclear earth penetrator cannot penetrate deep enough to contain the radioactive fallout it produces. Even the strongest bomb casing will crush itself by the time it penetrates 30 feet into rock or concrete. But to contain the yield of even just a one-kiloton nuclear warhead (less than 1/10th as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb), the bomb must have burrowedat least 200-300 feet. The high-yield RNEP, 1000 times larger, will produce tremendous fallout that will drift for more than a thousand miles downwind. As, Linton Brooks, the head of the National Nuclear Security Administration told Congress in April, "the laws of physics will [never result in a bomb penetrating] far enough to trap all fallout. This is a nuclear weapon that is going to be hugely destructive over a large area" if it goes off underground. RNEP could kill millions of people: UsModeling software developed for the Pentagon to simulate the use of RNEP against Iran shows that 3 million people would be killed by radiation within 2 weeks of the explosion. Another 35 million people in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India would be exposed to increased levels of cancer-causing radiation. RNEP would not be effective at destroying chemical or biological agents: Unless the weapon detonates nearly in the same room with the agents, it will not destroy them. Because the United States is unlikely to know the precise location, size and geometry of underground bunkers, a nuclear attack on a storage bunker containing chemical or biological agents would more likely spread those agents into the environment, along with the radioactive fallout. RNEP would not be effective at destroying deep or widely separated bunkers: The seismic shock produced by the RNEP would only be able to destroy bunkers to a depth of about a thousand feet. Modern bunkers can be deeper than that, with a widely separated complex of connected rooms and tunnels. There are more effective conventional alternatives to RNEP: Current precision-guided conventional weapons can be used to cut off a bunker's communications, power, and air, effectively keeping the enemy weapons underground and unusable until U.S. forces secure them. Sealing chemical or biological agents underground is far more sensible than trying to blow them up. Go Back