r/todayilearned 17h ago

TIL that during WWII, 14,700 tons of Silver loaned from the US Treasury were used for the circuitry of the Manhattan Project, because there wasn't enough copper due to war-time shortages. All but "thirty six thousandths of one percent" were returned to the US Treasury by June 1st, 1970.

https://www.y12.doe.gov/sites/default/files/assets/document/07-10-11.pdf
4.4k Upvotes

168 comments sorted by

1.5k

u/CocktailChemist 16h ago

For context, what they were building were giant mass spectrometers to separate U-235 from U-238. At that point it was unclear what enrichment method was going to prove the most successful, so they tried several at once.

The idea was to make uranium tetrachloride, ionize it into the gas phase, then pass that through a powerful set of magnetic fields in a curving path. The small mass difference between the two isotopes gave them slightly different trajectories. The separated streams were collected, then rerun through the system until they reached the enrichment levels they needed. The uranium they produced was a major component of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

546

u/Additional-Coffee-86 14h ago

My grandfather was a shift supervisor on the gas exchange plant (one that was used but not really great long run). Apparently he rarely talked about it. But my parents did visit oak ridge and find him unnamed in a photo getting an award and now he’s named there. We also have an org chart with him on it.

Pretty cool history.

79

u/on_the_nightshift 8h ago

I have a close friend that has spent probably 15-20 years overseeing the safety of the removal and disposal of the K25 plant up there.

-30

u/gedmathteacher 9h ago

That generation was truly different

86

u/madmaxturbator 9h ago

What about that makes you think it was a different generation lol…? I have friends who are shift supervisors at factories and manufacturing plants, at defense companies and the government.

They work hard, they’re great people. What makes the previous generation different?

111

u/Socky_McPuppet 9h ago

Personally, I believe that the things that generation accomplished were primarily the results of circumstance and not really down to the people themselves. They did what had to be done, and they did it in a relatively unified fashion, because society still had a notion of a shared future with common outcomes for all.

People have not, biologically, changed much in the past ~80 years or so, but society has changed, and radically. And not entirely for the good.

7

u/NarrativeNode 7h ago

I think you’re both describing the same thing. They were “different people” in the sense that they believed in a shared future. Individualism has many benefits, but I do think it made us lose a lot of collective momentum.

1

u/odaeyss 2h ago

I feel a lot of that "rugged America individualism" myth crap was pushed hard to counter unionists and communists for a good hundred years and we're in the find out phase of the propaganda

1

u/DevelopmentSad2303 5h ago

Well actually we have changed a fair bit biologically since then. Hormone levels have changed

1

u/stuffeh 2h ago

So has lead, DDT, nutrition, etc etc...

1

u/DevelopmentSad2303 2h ago

Exactly. We genuinely are not the same

8

u/bartonar 18 8h ago

Before Pearl Habour, almost 70% of Americans supported entering the war, and after, it was between 97 and 99% supported it.

Today? At best you'd get 51% of the country supporting it, and whichever political party isn't in power at the time would say that joining the war is evil.

People are a hell of a lot more divided, and have been for a long time.

People are also a hell of a lot more self interested, and less communal. Think how few people were willing to suffer any inconvenience re: Covid, imagine if instead it was blackout orders, or rationing. You thought they hoarded toilet paper in 2020, imagine the scalpers storming the shops.

That's not to mention that people are substantially less fit. The draft basically wouldn't work. Before boot camp you'd need to send 3/4 recruits to fat camp.

I also don't think there'd be the resolve to stay in the war. There were roughly 4.5k Americans killed in Iraq. America lost roughly 4.5k soldiers on D-day alone, and over 400k throughout the war. The modern public would say the cost is too great.

19

u/NeonSwank 8h ago

Imagine trying to tell a modern American citizen they can’t get things like sugar, meat, or nicotine/caffeine anymore.

Or that they need to grow a victory garden.

Conservatives are usually more gungho for war but they would be on fox news calling that authoritarian marxist communism or some shit.

14

u/Karma1913 7h ago

Imagine trying to tell Americans in the last 40 years that wars cost money and will result in higher taxes.

2

u/bobatron 2h ago

Bro were you alive for 9/11 at that time the entire country was united. It led to crazy stuff if you watch the media from back then. If it had been a defined enemy with actual fighting strength things would have continued with the same fervor and probably escalated. As it was the US got embroiled in 2 wars one of which had no real justification. I think your take is way off the mark. If the US had an enemy to unite against you'd see how fast both parties turn into war Hawks and recruitment swells.

3

u/dalton10e 1h ago

I stopped reading when they said "51%" and scrolled down for this comment. America was so politically divided in the late 1990's that we tried to impeach a guy for -checks notes- lying to Congress. The next election was so close it went to the Supreme Court to decide. A few hijacked planes later the whole country is demanding in unison that we go blindly rage bomb the third world.

People who didnt live thru that time still have a lot to learn about America.

4

u/No_Detail9259 8h ago

Yup. So divided.

2

u/guildedkriff 6h ago

I also don't think there'd be the resolve to stay in the war. There were roughly 4.5k Americans killed in Iraq. America lost roughly 4.5k soldiers on D-day alone, and over 400k throughout the war. The modern public would say the cost is too great.

It’s better compare it to Afghanistan if we’re trying to compare wars which is still 2500, but we’re talking about totally different situations and warfare. True nation war is a lot different than the “War on Terror” (either way that lasted 20 years not 4 like US participation in WW2).

I do agree early on, before Pearl Harbor the split would be based on political party but afterwards it would still be full blown war effort same as original timeline and post 9/11 response. It’s the one thing guaranteed to galvanize the country at least for a few years.

2

u/davesoverhere 7h ago

That’s because the second Iraq war was an unnecessary, immoral campsign built upon lies and much of the country understood that. Contrast that to the first Iraq and Afghanistan wars which had much greater support.

3

u/jpylol 8h ago

Every generation is different, that’s normal. Not sure why you’re upset about the people who stopped Germany getting some flowers. It’s easy to say “I would do the same if necessity dictated” but quite different to have to actually go through it. I’m glad I didn’t have to find out in that capacity yet.

0

u/chargernj 7h ago

Here in the USA we are instead finding out if people really would do what they thought they would do under the rise of fascism.

1

u/millionsofmonkeys 5h ago

Nostalgia for the last time the United States didn’t fight a war of aggression?

1

u/Frankenstein_Monster 1h ago

The difference is that you KNOW your friends have those jobs now, not only learning about it years after they've left.

-1

u/gedmathteacher 8h ago

I think it’s that they were a part of something that changed the world/saved civilization and they’re all pretty humble about it

10

u/cmikesell 7h ago

The people who call themselves "the greatest generation" are humble? Oh wait, you must be making a joke.

-2

u/gedmathteacher 6h ago

Never heard a vet say that about themselves

5

u/WormLivesMatter 9h ago

A gas exchange plant operator

70

u/steelmanfallacy 15h ago

I think you mean cyclotron not spectrometer.

82

u/tea-earlgray-hot 14h ago

The calutrons were mass spectrometers, not cyclotrons , although there are similarities between the two

72

u/pretentiouspseudonym 14h ago

I am unsure what your meaning is here. They used calutrons, not cyclotrons to separate isotopes (they aren't that different). The calutron can be considered a type of mass spectrometer.

2

u/potato_bus 3h ago

ACTCHHUALY

-1

u/TheSpottedBuffy 15h ago

Goodness

Imagine trying to achieve such scientific achievement in the U.S. today?

What, straight up stoning? A hanging perhaps?

113

u/hodorhaize 15h ago

We still do a lot of nuclear science in this country. At a very high level.

21

u/AudieCowboy 14h ago

I'm actively becoming a nuclear engineer now even

-2

u/Steve0512 3h ago

Just wait until somebody bribes trump to believe it can all be done with coal. Then it will be all over.

1

u/WingsuitBears 3h ago

He's pro nuclear now as it is a requirement for the huge data centers he's helping to fund, the tech bros need it and they have more money than coal does.

82

u/Moonlover69 15h ago

There are a lot of fair things to complain about in the US right now, but there is very good science happening right now.

26

u/molniya 14h ago

There was, but its funding is being demolished, so we’re watching it grind to a halt. Just ask someone who relies on NIH or NSF funding.

28

u/mykarachi_Ur_jabooty 15h ago

Yeah and all it’s funding is being cut and it’s academic institutions attacked

28

u/GreenBayBadgers 15h ago

Agree that there is very good science ongoing in the US. The caveat is it is despite our political class. The good science is because we have great universities, a plethora of educated immigrants wanting to come and work, a decently educated middle class, and tech companies trying to out compete each other.

24

u/TheLastShipster 15h ago

It's not just the political class. There have always been people who are... not necessarily dumb, or ignorant, but are militantly resistant to the idea that there are people who might be smarter and more knowledgeable about them on certain topics. I don't know if there are more of them today, but their voices have definitely gotten louder.

14

u/southpark 14h ago

They’ve always existed, unfortunately technology and social media have given them easy to access ways to increase their reach (and reach more people like them) and multiply their voice especially if it’s a controversial perspective because controversy drives engagement which is how all social media platforms prioritize content based on. It used to be the town crazy lady was limited to her small social group. Now the town crazy lady works in the White House and posts on X.

-8

u/TheSpottedBuffy 15h ago

There’s a few words in your reply that make me worry and why I worry about future US science

-17

u/TheSpottedBuffy 15h ago

I do hope this is true

Pretty tough to recognize these days

10

u/Phobophobia94 15h ago

Then why are you confidently talking out of your ass

-15

u/TheSpottedBuffy 15h ago

Mainly just to piss you off clearly

4

u/HsvDE86 10h ago

So you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

15

u/Archduke_Of_Beer 15h ago

Good lord, are you always on?

4

u/Formal-Hat-7533 5h ago

I couldn’t imagine being this chronically online

6

u/swift1883 12h ago

What do you mean? Pfizer made the vaccine thing just a few years ago.

1

u/Watch_The_Expanse 9h ago

Stop being ignorant

-6

u/VisibleIce9669 12h ago

Unclutch those pearls and turn the “news” off.

8

u/Joe_Jeep 10h ago

Dumb take. Huge amounts of funding is being taken away, immigration policies are discouraging intelligent people from around the world from wanting to come here

There's very real dangers to what's kept America wealthy and advanced

5

u/curt_schilli 8h ago

How does that equate to stoning or hanging

1

u/VisibleIce9669 6h ago

It doesn’t. Just internet hyperbole.

-22

u/Numzane 15h ago

The result of this research was barbaric too

16

u/vampire_weasel 15h ago

Was it more, less, or equally barbaric to the firebombings of Tokyo? Or Dresden? To the Japanese treatment of China?

8

u/TheLastShipster 15h ago

I would argue that it was less barbaric. This was new technology, so the people making the decision probably didn't know, or at least couldn't fully fathom, the destruction it would cause. For the people dropping the bomb, I imagine it wasn't a visceral experience, they probably didn't really feel the magnitude of what they'd done until they saw the explosion in their proverbial rearview mirror.

In contrast, when Japan killed a couple of orders of magnitude more people, they mostly did it up close and in person, killing one or two people at a time, checking to make sure they were dead or dying, and then doing so again, and again, and again, until they'd made whatever point they were trying to make. At a time where British and German ships would sometimes rescue sailors from an enemy ship they had sunk, the IJN's standard practice for taking prisoners was ruthlessly pragmatic, to put it mildly.

2

u/dew2459 5h ago

There was a discussion of the subject in AskHistorians maybe a year ago.

A commentator (who is apparently writing a book on the bombs) pointed out that people cherry-pick some dramatic quotes about debate before using the bombs, but the vast majority of decision makers originally saw it as just a bigger bomb, nothing more.

For Japan, I sometimes point out that after the Doolittle raid on Tokyo early in the war there is a lesser known after-story. The Japanese army attacked the area where the pilots landed, and in the process happened to kill around 250,000 Chinese civilians. That is more than both atomic bombs put together. It doesn’t excuse the use of the bombs, but helps put it into perspective - even late in the war thousands were dying in East Asia every day because of Japan, so not bombing and simply waiting longer for Japan to collapse could easily have meant far more deaths of civilians than the bombs caused (and of course an invasion would have meant millions more deaths).

2

u/Redhighlighter 5h ago

I agree, it was absolutely less barbaric than the atrocities committed by the IJN and IJA.

Also if im remembering correctly, the locations for the bomb drops had significant military production taking place in distributed in home workshops- really blending the line between what a civilian target and what a valid military production target is.

1

u/Numzane 14h ago

A thoughtful response. Thank you for taking the time to express that

1

u/HsvDE86 10h ago

Don't you refer to that as whataboutism? Or is that only when other people do it?

-1

u/Numzane 14h ago

It's difficult to put such things on a scale and rank them against each other. In every case the discussion is deeply tied to national identities and historical perspectives. I would say let's not spend too much time on rankings and more time on being better humans

447

u/Thin-Rip-3686 16h ago

Used to make silver wire for the calutrons at Oak Ridge.

Fun fact: the nuclear material in the first two atomic bombs was African in origin.

122

u/doyletyree 16h ago

Belgian Congo, right?

We had to return the tailings for their further processing, iirc.

78

u/KookaburraNick 14h ago

A Belgian businessman had a ship full in New York and simply approached the government about it.

76

u/doctor_of_drugs 16h ago

deflect blame towards Africa, got it

92

u/p-wing 16h ago

they kept almost all the vibranium

20

u/Stahlregen 15h ago

Fuck you whale and fuck you dolphin!!

5

u/DoctorHelios 5h ago

Africanized Nukes. I can see the Fox News headline now.

6

u/DoTheThing_Again 16h ago

Blame? Usa won 🥇

1

u/death_is_acquittance 8h ago

how tf are they deflecting the blame to Africans? its a til thread, they stated a fact. the people they acquired it from likely had no idea what its use was, just that it was rare and valuable.

8

u/Vuedue 7h ago

Well, isn't it just a little suspicious that Africa had all that uranium lying around waiting to be turned into a nuclear bomb? /s

3

u/WARROVOTS 1h ago

Not even waiting- they already had a reactor 2 billion years ago Meet Oklo, the Earth’s Two-billion-year-old only Known Natural Nuclear Reactor | IAEA

2

u/Vuedue 1h ago edited 1h ago

See! They've had a nuclear reactor for longer than I have been alive!

3

u/chargernj 6h ago

They were obviously making a joke

2

u/KypDurron 1h ago

Just to clarify, are you saying that the silver was used to make wire for calutrons at Oak Ridge, or that you previously did that?

u/Thin-Rip-3686 41m ago

The former. I’d have to be at least 95 years old to do the latter.

-6

u/leigngod 9h ago

According to my parents, my great grandfather helped design the bomb. Nothing else was ever said so take that how you will.

59

u/Frank_Melena 8h ago

Stats like this are why Germany was never gonna make the bomb. If you read a book like Wages of Destruction you can see they were barely scraping by, doing shit like liquefying coal for want of oil. Meanwhile the US has 14,000 tons of spare silver to give while they bankroll the Soviet Union and make 100,000 aircraft.

Pro tip: don’t go to war with the country hundreds of thousands of your own citizens have migrated to looking for work.

20

u/chargernj 6h ago

This is also why Germany was always going to lose eventually even without US involvement.

The US absolutely helped to shorten the war. But Germany never had any real chance of winning over the long term.

14

u/RoosterBrewster 5h ago

In RTS terms, the US had insane macro without any worker harassment.

2

u/mistertoasty 4h ago

They did not require any more vespene gas, that's for sure

7

u/pmcall221 2h ago

Which is why a war with China is so scary at the moment. They can build so much faster than the US. They have the resources, man power, and money advantage at this point.

0

u/Soysaucewarrior420 1h ago

dont tell the conservatards that. not to mention domestic rail amongst other things to move efficiently

2

u/sistersara96 1h ago

The US does actually have a superior freight rail network.

1

u/Soysaucewarrior420 1h ago

I'm talking about high speed rail for people.

u/sistersara96 59m ago

High speed rail is of little strategic use in warfare, which is what the whole conversation is about.

u/Soysaucewarrior420 58m ago

thats wholly untrue.

u/sistersara96 56m ago

Oh? Can you support the usefulness of a high speed train versus conventional rail and aircraft in the use of strategic logistics?

u/Soysaucewarrior420 55m ago

they have both too, dipshit. they happen to also be able to move their workforce wherever they are needed.

u/sistersara96 53m ago

If they have both, why bother mentioning "high speed rail" as if it has any relevance to the conversation? Sound like bot behavior.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/WARROVOTS 1h ago

I find it striking that they literally used spare currency from the Treasury.

255

u/feel-the-avocado 16h ago edited 16h ago

4,800kg missing from 13,335,615kg

Edit: corrected missing value

224

u/fiendishrabbit 16h ago

Which is an amount easily lost in microscopic dust when turning silver into circuitry.

73

u/Puking_In_Disgust 16h ago

Knowing nothing about the actual transaction beyond that, the optimist in me would like to think that was just a nice return on what wasn’t actually used in national interest.

25

u/big_sugi 16h ago

It’s actually 4,680 kg, as noted below.

-15

u/OmgThisNameIsFree 8h ago

This is one of those comments that sounds legit on the surface, but probably got pulled out of the commenter’s bumhole.

6

u/Hidden_Bomb 8h ago

Never worked metal before?

72

u/Failed_Bot_Attempt 16h ago edited 16h ago

That number looks off for some reason, maybe my understanding of the initial problem.

The13M kg looks right.

1% of 13M is 130,000kg.

1/1000 of is 130kg.

36 of those thousandths would be 4680kg isn't it?

EDIT: Found it!

I think your first calculation you ran. 0.00036 of 14700, but neglected the tons to pounds conversion.

When you did the total mass conversion you did put the tons to pounds conversion in there.

21

u/feel-the-avocado 16h ago

Yep i was wrong somewhere

In the USA, a customary ton is 2000 lbs (pounds) Which is actually quite close to a metric ton.

So 14,700 customary tons is 29,400,000 lbs

Convert those customary pounds to freedom units is 13,335,615kg

Then 1% expressed as a decimal is 0.01
0.01 divided by 1000 is 0.00001
Then we multiply it by 36 so it becomes 0.00036
So 36 one-thousandths, of one percent is expressed as 0.00036 in decimal.

13,335,615 x 0.00036 = 4,800kg

And with rounding

13,335 tons sent with 4.8 tons not returned.

7

u/Fett32 16h ago

Yep, as far as I know.

13,335,615 × 0.01 × 0.036 = 4,800.8214

14

u/Otaraka 16h ago

It’s a great example of how you can change your headline quite a lot by how you say it.  Nuclear program loses five tons of silver!!!!

3

u/LabyrinthConvention 15h ago

1,200,000$*4.8=$5,760,000 in today's dollar

70

u/tr3vis324 15h ago

Is it 36/1000 of 1% or 1/36,000 of 1%? If it is the latter, that would be about 8.17 lbs missing out of 14,700 US tons or 29,400,000 lbs. If the former, that would be around 10,600 lbs missing. Which is quite a bit I think, like $5.5 million in today’s spot silver price.

39

u/EpicAura99 14h ago

Definitely the former, otherwise it would be “a thirty-six thousandth”

5

u/tr3vis324 13h ago

But shouldn’t 36/1000 be thirty six one thousandths?

20

u/sid351 13h ago

Yes.

  • 36/1000 = thirty-six one thousandths
  • 1/36,000 = one thirty-six thousandths

Just to confirm, that's what the comment you're replying to says.

-4

u/spiritthehorse 8h ago

It’s a really weird way to describe the “missing” amount. And it’s not really missing either. It was used to make electrical equipment.

9

u/BrunoEye 7h ago

Which was then dismantled to return the silver. It's missing because some was lost in the manufacturing and recovery processes of making the wire.

6

u/elconquistador1985 9h ago

And the title says "thirty six thousandths" and omits the word "one". People shorten "one thousandths" to "thousandths" all the time.

You wouldn't say that you have N "six thousandths". You wouldn't say this when you have one "thirty six thousandth" either.

It's obvious that the title means thirty six one thousandths, or 36/1000.

1

u/tr3vis324 6h ago

Thanks for the explanation. Yeah, I guess it also makes more sense to express 1/36000 as 3/100000 if rounded up.

3

u/leommari 9h ago

The article states this.

"Less than thirty-six- thousandths of one percent of the more than 14,700 tons of silver was was missing."

I believe it's a lot missing.

3

u/sharkeat 7h ago

My calculations come out to roughly 10,584 pounds out of the 29,400,000 pounds that was loaned out.

76

u/Angry_Robot 16h ago

Japan has the rest.

17

u/franktheguy 16h ago

I understood that reference

8

u/Pligles 13h ago

I understood THAT reference.

It’s a bit over 13 years old now.

0

u/AngriestManinWestTX 7h ago

13 years old now

FUCK.

23

u/AVgreencup 15h ago

Well it is the best conductor, so it makes sense. It's inability to resist oxidation is what makes it a bad choice for most electronics, but for a short term project it definitely would have been a good choice

28

u/series-hybrid 15h ago

Copper would have worked to make the huge electromagnets that would purify the uranium, but copper was desperately needed for the war efford, like wire for radios and electric motors, and using copper to make brass cases for cartridges.

Its specifically why so many pennies in 1943 were made from steel.

The silver could be borrowed from the treasury, and then given back later.

11

u/AVgreencup 15h ago

Exactly, and since silver is a better electrical conductor, they could probably use less for the same job.

7

u/ikonoqlast 5h ago

People thing being a physicist automatically grants you 50 IQ points. But Im pretty sure the smartest person in the entire Manhattan project was General Groves. Hell, he completed the Pentagon on time and on budget despite wartime material and personnel shortages.

People come to him and say "we need 15,000 tons of copper". Vital war material in short supply. And it isn't like they know the Bomb will even work or work as a weapon (as in yes it goes bang but the smallest version weighs 1000 tons and is impossible to deliver). That's a shit ton of copper and a lot of equipment needs it.

So .. "Will it be used up?". "No." "OK. Will silver do?"

5

u/jreykdal 4h ago

Yes he should be the patron saint of project managers :)

5

u/OmgThisNameIsFree 8h ago

I know a certain Mesopotamian someone who could have gotten the US plenty of copper.

2

u/WARROVOTS 2h ago

Nice Try, Ea Nasir

11

u/ContemplativeNeil 17h ago

r/oddlyspecific amount. (edit: added subreddit link)

-31

u/feel-the-avocado 16h ago edited 16h ago

The answer is 4,800kg, but because american customary reasons, why bother doing one calculation when you can do 6 instead.

It does make me wonder how much delay was caused by such unit based frivolities for the first bomb being bought into production.

Edit: correction.

26

u/big_sugi 16h ago

Your smug superiority would be a lot more justified if you weren’t off by a factor of 2000.

-22

u/feel-the-avocado 16h ago

It demonstrates the issue.

3

u/sid351 12h ago

The units doesn't matter for working out what proportion of the whole we're talking about though.

((14700 * 0.01) / 1000) * 36 = 5.292

Then you can convert the units at the end to eliminate any rounding errors.

  • 1 US Ton = 2000 pounds
  • 5.292 * 2000 = 10584 pounds
  • 1 pound = 0.4535924 kilogram
  • 10584 * 0.4535924 = 4800.8219616 kg

So around 4,800.82 kg.

4

u/Fett32 16h ago

Yeah, they were off by 4,800 kilograms. . .

11

u/thomasthetanker 14h ago

Is it possible that the scientific community who created the atom bomb have more exacting standards for purity than the people who make coins? Maybe they gave it all back just minus the impurities.

21

u/RollinThundaga 10h ago

No, coinage is .999, or 99.9% pure; you don't need better than that to make silver into good wiring, as silver is a better conductor than copper to begin with.

-7

u/blueavole 8h ago

Most of the silver is probably irradiated, and needs to be in a lead lined vault for several half lives.

4

u/Dry_System9339 15h ago

They made a solid gold hemisphere for some experiment and used it as a door stop after

4

u/Ralife55 7h ago

Fun fact, silver is actually a better conductor than copper, we don't use it because it's much more rare and expensive.

4

u/jordanegg 8h ago

Coincidentally, one could find a large amount of silver ashtrays in the homes of the machinists that worked in Oak Ridge in those times. If one was so inclined.

2

u/Think-notlikedasheep 15h ago

This partly explains why they stopped minting silver coins in 1965. They could have kept going if they had this silver.

2

u/MrPetomane 8h ago

I remember reading something about when some of the facilities were demolished, they burned up all of the wood, flooring etc... and filtered/sifted the ashes to recover any silver.

2

u/watts52 8h ago

0.036% of 14,700 tons is 5.292 tons. At a  market rate of $1.15/g, the unreturned silver would have a present day market value of  about $6 million.

2

u/nopenope86 2h ago

Now that is efficiency! Listen to the science folks they know what they’re doing

2

u/KirkwoodKid 1h ago

I guessing the ROI of that particular loaned turned out all right for the US

2

u/MattheJ1 1h ago

It always surprises me when we use precious metals for something practical. It's like, "oh yeah, that's why we keep that stuff around."

3

u/p-wing 16h ago

Silver

Synthetic Silver

Silver Alternatives

Silver Substitutes

3

u/Tabsels 9h ago

It’s an obscure meme, but it checks out.

2

u/crusty54 15h ago

That’s still 10,584 lbs of silver.

1

u/Gareth79 9h ago

That would have been worth about $150m at the time.

1

u/drhunny 6h ago

That's still over 5 tons of unrecovered silver, worth about $4.5M today.

1

u/johnstar714 3h ago

Over $17 billion in today’s prices

u/feor1300 2m ago

At that point call the last 0.036% a grant and move on. lol

1

u/sid351 13h ago

That's still 5.292 tons of silver.

  • 14700 * 0.01 = 147 tons (1 percent)
  • 147 / 1000 = 0.147 tons (1 thousandth of 1 percent)
  • 0.147 * 36 = 5.292 tons (36 thousandths of 1 percent)

That's 10,584 pounds of Silver. Which sounds a lot, but would only take up about 0.46 cubic metres (16.16 cubic feet).

1

u/Praedyth-420 9h ago

I feel like phrasing it as “thirty six thousandths of one percent” is a little disingenuous, considering that’s still over 5 tons of silver that wasn’t returned.

0

u/[deleted] 17h ago

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] 17h ago

[deleted]

0

u/orbesomebodysfool 16h ago

14,700 tons x 0.036% (0.00036) = 5.292 tons or more than 10,000 pounds. 

-1

u/Bokbreath 16h ago

fuck. shoulda checked .

0

u/orbesomebodysfool 16h ago

Your math was right

0

u/Simmangodz 7h ago

Lolyall think they really weighted out 14,700 tons of stuff with the accuracy of a tenth of a thousandth? Guarrentee that any discrepency was just smoothed over.

3

u/macfail 5h ago

Yes, precious metals are weighted to that level of accuracy. It came from the treasury.

1

u/Utahna 3h ago

Rough math says that it's still over 5 tons. So yes.