Re: Skunk Works

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Saturday, October 18, 2014 6:49:31 PM UTC-4, Bob La Londe wrote:
>=20
>=20
> I believe some satellites were powered with a nuclear battery.  The=20
>=20
> distinction I do not know, but supposedly it is not a reactor.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> From Wikipedia.  This does not sound like a reactor to me:
>=20
>=20
>=20
> A radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG, RITEG) is an electrical=20
>=20
> generator that uses an array of thermocouples to convert the heat release=
d=20
>=20
> by the decay of a suitable radioactive material into electricity by the=
=20
>=20
> Seebeck effect.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> RTGs have been used as power sources in satellites, space probes and=20
>=20
> unmanned remote facilities such as a series of lighthouses built by the=
=20
>=20
> former Soviet Union inside the Arctic Circle. RTGs are usually the most=
=20
>=20
> desirable power source for robotic or unmaintained situations that need a=
=20
>=20
> few hundred watts (or less) of power for durations too long for fuel cell=
s,=20
>=20
> batteries, or generators to provide economically and in places where sola=
r=20
>=20
> cells are not practical. Safe use of RTGs requires containment of the=20
>=20
> radioisotopes long after the productive life of the unit.

Isn't that the whole problem with fusion?=20

People keep saying we should use more nuclear power plants for cheaper powe=
r but they seem to forget that the waste material is going to last for the =
next half million years or so. What to do with it has been the problem righ=
t from the beginning and something no one figures into the cost of running =
one of these plants.

I remember reading that there is another kind of fusion that requires much =
more up front cost but is much cleaner. But ..... you know how far that's g=
oing to go when it's much easier to bury the waste and let it contaminate t=
he earth some more. I sure hope we can colonize Mars and more before this p=
lanet starts to get even with us for what we've done to it. =20