Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
None.How many miles could an electric car go on a single charge with
plutonium batteries?.
You don't 'charge' plutonium 'batteries'.The Voyagers are still running on them.
Uh,wrong.Van Chocstraw <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote in
news:ds2dnbDvWsm14SjUnZ2dnUVZ_iwLAAAA@giganews.com:
How many miles could an electric car go on a single charge with
plutonium batteries?.
None.
The Voyagers are still running on them.
You don't 'charge' plutonium 'batteries'.
Plutonium (under the right conditions) is a source of heat (along with
a lot of dangerous radiation).
Uh,RTGs are not "reactors".By using thermocouples and a heat source (along with a heat sink [for
Voyager, the 'sink' is "space"]) you can generate electricity.
So, to power a car with plutonium, you would need enough plutonium to
produce heat at the rate needed to power the car. Exercise for the
reader: calculate the amount of plutonium needed to produce the power
needed to produce the horsepower of YOUR car. Lookup the amount of
power needed by Voyager. Compare.
The 'battery' would produce that amount of heat ALL the time[unless
there was a mechanism to control the fission rate of the plutonium,
say by separating the parts of the nuclear reactor and shielding them
from each other]. A difficult and complicated mechanical task.
not in RTGs.It would produce a hazardous amount of neutrons and other radiation,
Again,NOT a "potent source of radiation". Poisonous,yes.requiring a LOT of heavy shielding. Making the car heavier, and thus
requiring MORE energy to power the car.
It would need a way to get rid of the heat produced. (Voyager radiates
the heat into space). Imagine a car with two car sized, black, wing
shaped "radiators" that would add to the aerodynamic drag and be an
accident hazard. Or perhaps you would rather carry a tank of water and
let the production of steam cool the plutonium. What happens if your
tank runs dry? Meltdown!
The reactor would be a major hazard if broken open in an wreck.
Plutonium is a potent source of radiation and very 'poisonous'.
doubtful;wrong isotope,in RTGs.It would be a weapon that terrorists could use. They could open it,
take out the plutonium and scatter it around.
They could collect the plutonium from several batteries and build a
'suitcase' bomb.
There are many very good reasons to NOT use 'plutonium batteries' in
cars, here, on earth.
I can't think of ANY good reasons to use 'plutonium batteries' to
power cars. There are good reasons to use them for some space
missions.
About as poisonous as lead. If you're in the EU don't makebz <bz+ser@ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in
news:Xns9BCA4F30EE258WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote@130.39.198.139:
The reactor would be a major hazard if broken open in an wreck.
Plutonium is a potent source of radiation and very 'poisonous'.
Again,NOT a "potent source of radiation". Poisonous,yes.
Pu oxide is pyrophoric,too.And it oxidizes easily.In article <Xns9BCA82E8EEBA4jyanikkuanet@74.209.136.87>,
jyanik@abuse.gov says...
bz <bz+ser@ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in
news:Xns9BCA4F30EE258WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote@130.39.198.139:
The reactor would be a major hazard if broken open in an wreck.
Plutonium is a potent source of radiation and very 'poisonous'.
Again,NOT a "potent source of radiation". Poisonous,yes.
About as poisonous as lead. If you're in the EU don't make
electronics out of it.
How far can you go on a power source that delivers only about 300How many miles could an electric car go on a single charge with
plutonium batteries?. The Voyagers are still running on them.
of course,that is only if you have the Pu in just ONE mass,instead ofOn Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:29:27 -0400, Van Chocstraw
boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote:
How many miles could an electric car go on a single charge with
plutonium batteries?. The Voyagers are still running on them.
How far can you go on a power source that delivers only about 300
watts? (Hint: 1 horsepower = 746 watts). The Voyager "battery" uses
thermocouples to produce the electricity. While very efficient, with
no moving parts it is very reliable.
The Voyager Pu-238 batteries use 11 kg of the toxic Pu-238 stuff.
Assuming 33% conversion efficiency, to build a 100 horsepower vehicle,
you would need 6,500 kg of Pu-238 using the same technology. Not
every useful. You would probably be better off using the heat to boil
water and power your vehicle with a steam engine.
Incidentally, 11 kg is very close to the critical mass for Pu-238, so
anything bigger would probably cause control and safety issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass
http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/ms9900313/ms9900313.html
Light reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon
Fear mongers is why we don't have plutonium batteries.Van Chocstraw <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote in
news:ds2dnbDvWsm14SjUnZ2dnUVZ_iwLAAAA@giganews.com:
How many miles could an electric car go on a single charge with
plutonium batteries?.
None.
The Voyagers are still running on them.
You don't 'charge' plutonium 'batteries'.
Plutonium (under the right conditions) is a source of heat (along with a
lot of dangerous radiation).
By using thermocouples and a heat source (along with a heat sink [for
Voyager, the 'sink' is "space"]) you can generate electricity.
So, to power a car with plutonium, you would need enough plutonium to
produce heat at the rate needed to power the car. Exercise for the reader:
calculate the amount of plutonium needed to produce the power needed to
produce the horsepower of YOUR car. Lookup the amount of power needed by
Voyager. Compare.
The 'battery' would produce that amount of heat ALL the time[unless there
was a mechanism to control the fission rate of the plutonium, say by
separating the parts of the nuclear reactor and shielding them from each
other]. A difficult and complicated mechanical task.
It would produce a hazardous amount of neutrons and other radiation,
requiring a LOT of heavy shielding. Making the car heavier, and thus
requiring MORE energy to power the car.
It would need a way to get rid of the heat produced. (Voyager radiates the
heat into space). Imagine a car with two car sized, black, wing shaped
"radiators" that would add to the aerodynamic drag and be an accident
hazard. Or perhaps you would rather carry a tank of water and let the
production of steam cool the plutonium. What happens if your tank runs dry?
Meltdown!
The reactor would be a major hazard if broken open in an wreck. Plutonium
is a potent source of radiation and very 'poisonous'.
It would be a weapon that terrorists could use. They could open it, take
out the plutonium and scatter it around.
They could collect the plutonium from several batteries and build a
'suitcase' bomb.
There are many very good reasons to NOT use 'plutonium batteries' in cars,
here, on earth.
I can't think of ANY good reasons to use 'plutonium batteries' to power
cars. There are good reasons to use them for some space missions.
an electron producer what doesn't deplete. Cells can be ganged up likeOn Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:29:27 -0400, Van Chocstraw
boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote:
How many miles could an electric car go on a single charge with
plutonium batteries?. The Voyagers are still running on them.
How far can you go on a power source that delivers only about 300
watts? (Hint: 1 horsepower = 746 watts). The Voyager "battery" uses
thermocouples to produce the electricity. While very efficient, with
no moving parts it is very reliable.
The Voyager Pu-238 batteries use 11 kg of the toxic Pu-238 stuff.
Assuming 33% conversion efficiency, to build a 100 horsepower vehicle,
you would need 6,500 kg of Pu-238 using the same technology. Not
every useful. You would probably be better off using the heat to boil
water and power your vehicle with a steam engine.
Incidentally, 11 kg is very close to the critical mass for Pu-238, so
anything bigger would probably cause control and safety issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass
http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/ms9900313/ms9900313.html
Light reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon
We don't have to make them like Voyager. Use plutonium like lithium as
I believe it was you that suggested "The Voyagers are still running onJeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:29:27 -0400, Van Chocstraw
boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote:
How many miles could an electric car go on a single charge with
plutonium batteries?. The Voyagers are still running on them.
How far can you go on a power source that delivers only about 300
watts? (Hint: 1 horsepower = 746 watts). The Voyager "battery" uses
thermocouples to produce the electricity. While very efficient, with
no moving parts it is very reliable.
The Voyager Pu-238 batteries use 11 kg of the toxic Pu-238 stuff.
Assuming 33% conversion efficiency, to build a 100 horsepower vehicle,
you would need 6,500 kg of Pu-238 using the same technology. Not
every useful. You would probably be better off using the heat to boil
water and power your vehicle with a steam engine.
Incidentally, 11 kg is very close to the critical mass for Pu-238, so
anything bigger would probably cause control and safety issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass
http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/ms9900313/ms9900313.html
Light reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon
We don't have to make them like Voyager.
Pu-238 decay produces lots of alpha particles but no electrons.Use plutonium like lithium as
an electron producer what doesn't deplete.
If one cell of Pu-238 has a half life of 87.7 years, 100 cells have aCells can be ganged up like
regular batteries except that they would last 100 times as long.
Half the battery warranty expires after 87.7 years. Drop in a newI don't
know about recharging only reprocessing.
True for critical mass, but not so true for thermal meltdown. Itof course,that is only if you have the Pu in just ONE mass,instead of
dividing it into subcritical cells and summing the outputs.
I like to call it a "pile" or in this case, a "thermopile".BTW,a "battery" is a number of individual CELLS,
wired together for a higher output.
Oh, I thought the plutonium atom had plenty of loose electrons.On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:02:32 -0400, Van Chocstraw
boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:29:27 -0400, Van Chocstraw
boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote:
How many miles could an electric car go on a single charge with
plutonium batteries?. The Voyagers are still running on them.
How far can you go on a power source that delivers only about 300
watts? (Hint: 1 horsepower = 746 watts). The Voyager "battery" uses
thermocouples to produce the electricity. While very efficient, with
no moving parts it is very reliable.
The Voyager Pu-238 batteries use 11 kg of the toxic Pu-238 stuff.
Assuming 33% conversion efficiency, to build a 100 horsepower vehicle,
you would need 6,500 kg of Pu-238 using the same technology. Not
every useful. You would probably be better off using the heat to boil
water and power your vehicle with a steam engine.
Incidentally, 11 kg is very close to the critical mass for Pu-238, so
anything bigger would probably cause control and safety issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass
http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/ms9900313/ms9900313.html
Light reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon
We don't have to make them like Voyager.
I believe it was you that suggested "The Voyagers are still running on
them." More on the Pu-238 battery design:
http://nuclear.energy.gov/neac/Meetings/Apr212008/NEGTN0NEAC_PU-238_042108.pdf
Note: I are not an expert on fizzix, thermodynamics, or nuclear
power.
If not like Voyager, what are you suggesting? With an energy density
of 0.57 watts/gram, the 11kg of Pu-238 should produce 6,270 watts. Of
course, your (Carnot) heat engine isn't going to be 100% efficient.
For example, the Voyager thermopile appears to be about 5% efficient.
If you take my suggestion and build a steam engine, you might get
about 20% efficiency (including gear losses), which should be barely
adequate to run a very small vehicle. Of course, it may take several
weeks to build up enough steam pressure to go anywhere.
I think you have successfully blundering upon the basic problem with
energy conversion and transportation. Transportation devices want
concentrated energy, available on demand, and lots of it. Most
natural sources of energy are not very concentrated. That's for good
reason as if they were concentrated, they would have disappeared or
diffused long ago. It's like solar power. There's lots of it around,
but it's not very concentrated (1Kw/sq-meter). The best you can do is
accumulate some diffuse source of energy (solar, wind, nuclear
battery), into some manner of energy storage (pressure, phase changes,
battery, air pressure, etc), and use it in its concentrated form when
needed.
Incidentally, there's a small problem with operating temperature. The
Voyager Pu-238 battery only operates in space, where the ambient
temperature is near absolute zilch (-273C) with a differential
operating temperature of about 300C at the thermocouples. If you try
to operate it at 25C, the thermocouples will run mighty hot, and the
entire assembly end up at about 1200C. As heat loss is energy loss, I
hope your proposed vehicle battery design is very well thermally
insulated.
I don't want to discourage you from revolutionizing automobile design,
but I think it might be useful if you did some calculations or back of
the envelope estimates before you proceed.
Use plutonium like lithium as
an electron producer what doesn't deplete.
Pu-238 decay produces lots of alpha particles but no electrons.
Cells can be ganged up like
regular batteries except that they would last 100 times as long.
If one cell of Pu-238 has a half life of 87.7 years, 100 cells have a
half life of 87.7 years, 1,000,000 cells have a half life of 87.7
years, etc.
I don't
know about recharging only reprocessing.
Half the battery warranty expires after 87.7 years. Drop in a new
lump of Pu-238 and drive off in a smog of alpha particles.
More light reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_battery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot_heat_engine
Pu melts at 912.5K.On 11 Mar 2009 02:54:05 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
of course,that is only if you have the Pu in just ONE mass,instead of
dividing it into subcritical cells and summing the outputs.
True for critical mass, but not so true for thermal meltdown. It
really depends on insulation. If the outside of the battery were
properly insulated, Pu-238 will continue to pump energy into an almost
adiabatic (perfectly insulated) system until it gets hot enough to
melt. The heat has to go somewhere. As built, the Cassini and
Voyager batteries run at about 1000K.
That's for metallic Plutonium 238. Plutonium Dioxide melts at 2240C.Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in
news:t4pfr49gg4fvvlj8sd1lp85emd15oru23m@4ax.com:
On 11 Mar 2009 02:54:05 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
of course,that is only if you have the Pu in just ONE mass,instead of
dividing it into subcritical cells and summing the outputs.
True for critical mass, but not so true for thermal meltdown. It
really depends on insulation. If the outside of the battery were
properly insulated, Pu-238 will continue to pump energy into an almost
adiabatic (perfectly insulated) system until it gets hot enough to
melt. The heat has to go somewhere. As built, the Cassini and
Voyager batteries run at about 1000K.
Pu melts at 912.5K.
A marshmallow-sized lump of Pu would weigh rather more than 40g (I believe),"Cassini will use three RTGs, which convert thermal energy from
plutonium decay into electrical energy. Each RTG contains 72 small
pellets of plutonium-238 dioxide, each about the size of a
marshmallow and weighing 150 grams. Each pellet is encased in many
layers of protective materials, and the complete unit is called a
general purpose heat source (GPHS) module. All together these 72
heat sources put out 4400 watts of thermal energy at an operating
temperature of 1200°C to 1300°C. Using a set of thermocouples, the
RTG converts this heat energy to about 285 watts of electricity."
Note the 1200C to 1300C operating temperature. However, furthur down,
it says:
"Each RHU weighs only 40 grams and generates one watt of thermal
energy through radioactive decay, operating at about body
temperature (35°C-40°C)."
Maybe they're both right if I make an assumption. If the 1200C is the"Cassini will use three RTGs, which convert thermal energy from
plutonium decay into electrical energy. Each RTG contains 72 small
pellets of plutonium-238 dioxide, each about the size of a
marshmallow and weighing 150 grams. Each pellet is encased in many
layers of protective materials, and the complete unit is called a
general purpose heat source (GPHS) module. All together these 72
heat sources put out 4400 watts of thermal energy at an operating
temperature of 1200°C to 1300°C. Using a set of thermocouples, the
RTG converts this heat energy to about 285 watts of electricity."
Note the 1200C to 1300C operating temperature. However, furthur down,
it says:
"Each RHU weighs only 40 grams and generates one watt of thermal
energy through radioactive decay, operating at about body
temperature (35°C-40°C)."
A marshmallow-sized lump of Pu would weigh rather more than 40g (I believe),
and it approaches the size where it runs quite hot, if not quite
incandescent (which I think it hits at around golfball-size).
Clearly these numbers are wildly inconsistent.
IDIOT.Fear mongers is why we don't have plutonium batteries.
You're talking complete drivel, probably intentionally.We don't have to make them like Voyager. Use plutonium like lithium as
an electron producer what doesn't deplete.