SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Initial tests of NASA's Kilopower nuclear power system have been successful, and full-power testing will be done in March. Each Kilopower unit is expected to provide between 1 kW to 10 kW of electric power:
Months-long testing began in November at the energy department's Nevada National Security Site, with an eye toward providing energy for future astronaut and robotic missions in space and on the surface of Mars, the moon or other solar system destinations.
A key hurdle for any long-term colony on the surface of a planet or moon, as opposed to NASA's six short lunar surface visits from 1969 to 1972, is possessing a power source strong enough to sustain a base but small and light enough to allow for transport through space. "Mars is a very difficult environment for power systems, with less sunlight than Earth or the moon, very cold nighttime temperatures, very interesting dust storms that can last weeks and months that engulf the entire planet," said Steve Jurczyk, associate administrator of NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate. "So Kilopower's compact size and robustness allows us to deliver multiple units on a single lander to the surface that provides tens of kilowatts of power," Jurczyk added.
[...] Lee Mason, NASA's principal technologist for power and energy storage, said Mars has been the project's main focus, noting that a human mission likely would require 40 to 50 kilowatts of power. The technology could power habitats and life-support systems, enable astronauts to mine resources, recharge rovers and run processing equipment to transform resources such as ice on the planet into oxygen, water and fuel. It could also potentially augment electrically powered spacecraft propulsion systems on missions to the outer planets.
NASA's next Mars mission is InSight, a stationary lander scheduled to launch in May. It will use two MegaFlex solar arrays from Orbital ATK. NASA's Mars 2020 rover is scheduled to launch in July 2020. It will use 4.8 kg of plutonium dioxide to provide no more than 110 Watts of power.
The Juno mission is the first mission to Jupiter to use solar panels. Juno uses 72 square meters of solar panels to generate a maximum of just 486 Watts at Jupiter. Mars receives about 12 times more solar radiation per m2 than Jupiter. The New Horizons mission to Pluto and Cassini–Huygens mission to Saturn both used radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs). Cassini used three RTGs originally rated for 300 W each. A spare Cassini RTG was used for New Horizons, which provided 245.7 W at launch (~200 W by the Pluto encounter).
The Fission System Gateway to Abundant Power for Exploration
Also at NASA and Popular Science.
Previously: NASA's Kilopower Project Testing a Nuclear Stirling Engine
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 30 2018, @04:53PM (1 child)
You just typed all and still are trying to downplay the effectiveness of even a small atomic bomb? It's more damaging than that. You get complete destruction in that few block area; you probably will get a firestorm that will consume a larger area (and kill most people in that area); you get weeks of radioactive fallout and injury issues (people being evacuated, treated for radiation exposure and heat burns); and you get years of clean up drama. It's a very effective attack from the point of view of a would-be terrorist or someone tasked with trying to do something about said potential attack.
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:05PM
The effectiveness of a small atomic bomb against a modern city is quite low (compared to what people seem to expect), but I guess the issue is that I'm comparing it to the intial assumption (that is was launched from a spaceborne adversary) in which case it is an odd choice of weapon.
You'd be unlikely to get a firestorm (albeit it is a possibility), but you'd get at least one heck of a conflagration.
Radioactive fallout is a minor issue as long as people stick to bottled water (incl softdrinks) and stay indoors (exactly as you should do with chemical mishaps) until evac-people can get to them.
Radiation exposure is a line of sight issue and given that the radiation is faster than the shockwave this means most stuff will be absorbed in the buildings (and higher buildings really cuts off angles from airbusts) - but I agree on that this is the main mode of killing (unless going for a sports-stadium during a game or similar).
Heatburns (from primary source) is for all intent and purpose a radiation exposure (with it being actual radiation).
The psychological impacts (evacuation and clean up) will be major unless the population have basic training/education for disasters and radiation - this I agree on.
The main isssue with cleanup is that most people balk at doing it the fast way - which is identical with how you do cleanups from chemical mishaps (but for some reason polticians insist on getting in the way instead of letting the experts have free reins).
And no, not trying to downplay it - rather just point out that a 20kt nuke is a much milder beast towards a modern city with modern capabitilies to render aid and response than what people would expect (and - excepting deathtoll due to higher population density - would be less than against either hiroshima and nagasaki due to better structures and hopefully better knowledge about how to react)