Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday January 14 2019, @02:06PM   Printer-friendly
from the glowing-idea dept.

NASA's deep-space nuclear-power crisis may soon end, thanks to a clever new robot in Tennessee

The US government says a new robot is poised to help it create a reliable, long-term supply chain of plutonium-238 (Pu-238): a radioactive material NASA requires to explore deep space.

NASA uses Pu-238 to power its most epic space missions— among them New Horizons (now beyond Pluto), the Voyagers (now in interstellar space), and Cassini (now part of Saturn).

[...] NASA tried to address the shrinking of its supply in the 1990s, but the agency and its partners didn't secure funding to create a new pipeline for Pu-238 until 2012. That work, which gets about $20 million in funding per year, is finally starting to move from the research phase toward full-scale production. By 2025, the Department of Energy hopes to meet the NASA-mandated need of 3.3 pounds (1,500 grams) per year.

Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which is located in Tennessee and leading the work, says it recently proved there is a way to produce eight times as much Pu-238 as it made just a couple of years ago, thanks to a new automated robot. [...] This week, the lab said in a press release that it's ready to push annual production to more than 14 ounces (400 grams) per year, an eight-fold increase.

Cassini carried 33 kilograms of plutonium. New Horizons had 9,750 grams (lower than the 10,900 grams, 1/3 of the Cassini amount, called for in the original design).

It's time to send a probe to Uranus and Neptune already.

Previously: US Resumes Making Pu-238 after Decades Long Hiatus
NASA Unlikely to Have Enough Plutonium-238 for Missions by the Mid-2020s


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by redneckmother on Monday January 14 2019, @04:11PM (7 children)

    by redneckmother (3597) on Monday January 14 2019, @04:11PM (#786467)

    So, let's increase the manufacture of the (probably) most poisonous substance known to humanity, and send it willy-nilly into the void... Great idea!

    --
    Mas cerveza por favor.
  • (Score: 3, Touché) by PartTimeZombie on Monday January 14 2019, @07:53PM (6 children)

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday January 14 2019, @07:53PM (#786595)

    I am unsure what damage you think a few kilos of plutonium might do in space?

    • (Score: 4, Funny) by takyon on Monday January 14 2019, @08:17PM

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Monday January 14 2019, @08:17PM (#786603) Journal

      Marooned astronauts could take off their helmets and breathe in the plutonium dust.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 1, Disagree) by redneckmother on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:41AM (4 children)

      by redneckmother (3597) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:41AM (#786753)

      Assuming (ass u me ing) it stays there, perhaps contaminating something (or someplace) we might want to visit in the future? Contaminating (or perhaps, destroying) some life form of which we're unaware? Falling back to our planet?

      Yeah, it's kinda doubtful, but why take the chance? We should consider the consequences... "normal accidents"?

      One gram of it, aerosolized, is enough to (eventually) kill every human on Earth. Bad stuph.

      --
      Mas cerveza por favor.
      • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:53AM (3 children)

        by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:53AM (#786758)

        One gram of it, aerosolized, is enough to (eventually) kill every human on Earth. Bad stuph.

        I don't think that's true. Can you provide a source?

        You might also be surprised to know that as soon as you leave the protection of Earth's magnetic field, any man-made radiation is absolutely swamped by the radiation from the Sun.

        A little plutonium would not even be noticed, and as far a contamination goes, I don't think you realise quite how big space is.

        • (Score: 1) by redneckmother on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:12AM (2 children)

          by redneckmother (3597) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:12AM (#786826)

          Thanks for doubting that assertion. On reflection, the "one gram" is probably from my faltering memory. I should think that it would take at least 454 grams (one pound) to achieve that effect. I regret that I'm unable to locate the book from which I read the statistic... my library is packed away, pending a move.

          Thank you for reminding me to avoid "talking out of my ass" :-).

          Nonetheless, the alpha emitter nature of plutonium isotopes make them extremely hazardous to life forms as we know them, and some have extraordinarily long lifetimes. I prefer that we avoid producing them and leaving them about "for the kids to find".

          --
          Mas cerveza por favor.
          • (Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Tuesday January 15 2019, @11:38AM

            by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday January 15 2019, @11:38AM (#786856) Journal

            Your new figure is just as false as the 1 gram assertion.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassini%E2%80%93Huygens#Plutonium_power_source [wikipedia.org]

            Had there been any malfunction causing the probe to collide with the Earth, NASA's complete environmental impact study estimated that, in the worst case (with an acute angle of entry in which Cassini would gradually burn up), a significant fraction of the 33 kg of plutonium-238 inside the RTGs would have been dispersed into the Earth's atmosphere so that up to five billion people (i.e. almost the entire terrestrial population) could have been exposed, causing up to an estimated 5,000 additional cancer deaths over the subsequent decades (0.0005 per cent, i.e. a fraction 0.000005, of a billion cancer deaths expected anyway from other causes; the product is incorrectly calculated elsewhere as 500,000 deaths). However, the chance of this happening were estimated to be less than one in one million.

            33 kg (73 lbs) spreads across the whole planet, and you get an utterly unnoticeable jump in cancer deaths. If a similar-sized RTG were to blow up in the 2030s, we could probably find a cure for most cancers before most of those people died.

            Maybe you were thinking of some other isotope? The one used in RTGs is plutonium-238.

            --
            [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
          • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday January 15 2019, @06:54PM

            by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @06:54PM (#786997)

            I prefer to keep things civil on Soylent, and don't tend to use phrases like "talking out of your ass".*

            I do think however that you ought to do a little more research about plutonium 238, as it is not nearly as toxic as you might think. You should avoid storing it under your bed in a cardboard box, but once it is sent into space there is no possible damage it might do.

            * It's spelled "arse" anyway.