[Southack]

"I don't understand why we need to make more plutonium. I'm not AGAINST it... I strongly support our nation's nuclear development... But IMHO, doesn't it make more sense to reprocess and recycle the plutonium that we already have???"

You've got at least 3 factors coming into play:
1. Different isotopes of Plutonium (Pu-239 for bombs, Pu-238 for batteries),
2. Half life of Plutonium means that existing stockpiles decay into *other* elements/isotopes over time (and we've been making Plutonium since 1939 at UCal),
3. Costs of re-processing versus making from scratch.

[Willie Green]

Different isotopes of Plutonium (Pu-239 for bombs, Pu-238 for batteries),

Okay, that makes sense.
Different isotopes for different uses.

Half life of Plutonium means that existing stockpiles decay into *other* elements/isotopes over time (and we've been making Plutonium since 1939 at UCal),

Yeah, that's the stuff I'm in favor of reprocessing and recycling as best we can.

3. Costs of re-processing versus making from scratch.

Yeah, well the investment for recycling might be greater than what's needed to produce virgin material from scratch (resulting in a lower ROI.) But we still have to do SOMETHING with the so-called "waste". I figure that, instead of spending billions to just bury it, might as well run it through some kind of reactor and get some electricity out of it. That might not be as "efficient" as commercial nuclear reactors, but at least we'll be getting something useful out of the stockpiled "waste".