A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

CNN article about nuclear power on space probes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old February 19th 04, 09:45 PM
quibbler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default CNN article about nuclear power on space probes

Here's an article that CNN has about nuclear power on space probes. I
list some questions about it below

http://www.space.com/businesstechnol..._focus_040218-
1.html
(Note the line wrap on link.)

One thing that kind of bothers me is the statement that, "The Energy
Department, working with industry, is designing a space-qualified nuclear
fission reactor capable of generating 100 kilowatts of power -- about
1,000 times more than most solar-powered space probes have available
today." Is it true that the average space probe today only uses about
100 Watts? I'm pretty sure that thin film collectors can produce up to
several kilowatts per kilogram of PV panel (at Earth orbit insolation
levels) and that fresnels or other concentrators can improve this power
to weight ratio further. OTOH, the thermal energy produced by a kg of
PU238 is about 500 Watts and a stirling may only allow them to get 30% of
that converted into electricity. Furthermore, new technologies are
allowing for even lighter weight PV and light weight solar thermal
concentrators. I'd think that you'd have to be very far from the sun or
doing fairly exotic things before an RTG only approach would be the best
or the cheapest.

Also, I was wondering about this. It seems to me that rather than using
just Stirlings or just thermal diodes that it should be possible to use
the Stirling as the primary source and the thermal diodes to top off.
The diodes and thermionics are very light weight. They would remove some
of the heat that would otherwise be available to the stirling engine, but
if they didn't drop the overall temperature inordinately then I would
think that they could still produce net power beyond what the Stirling
alone could achieve. Modern thermal diodes can actually be quite
efficient. But, of course, like I said above, these same technologies
could also be used with solar concentrators on many space probes.

--
__________________________________________________ ___
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
G. Forbat's new theory of space REPLY to objections Gary Forbat Space Station 0 July 5th 04 02:27 AM
Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) Rand Simberg Space Science Misc 18 February 14th 04 03:28 AM
Asteroid First, Moon, Mars...later Al Jackson Policy 28 September 12th 03 05:58 PM
Asteroid first, Moon, Mars Later Al Jackson Space Science Misc 0 September 3rd 03 03:40 PM
Nuclear power in space Brian Gaff Space Shuttle 5 August 2nd 03 01:58 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.