Slashdot Mirror


Nuclear Battery That Runs 10 Years

Jenny writes "A battery with a lifespan measured in decades is in development at the University of Rochester, as scientists demonstrate a new fabrication method that in its roughest form is already 10 times more efficient than current nuclear batteries -- and has the potential to be nearly 200 times more efficient. Similar to the way solar panels work by catching photons from the sun and turning them into current, the science of betavoltaics uses silicon to capture electrons emitted from a radioactive gas, such as tritium, to form a current. As the electrons strike a special pair of layers called a 'p-n junction,' a current results. I can imagine lots of applications for this new battery including my own laptop."

35 of 689 comments (clear)

  1. Great... by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 4, Funny

    So now instead of just overheating... my laptop can have a total meltdown?

    --

    "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

    Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    1. Re:Great... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I realize you're joking, but just for the record these *can't* go into a "meltdown" state (what is technically termed a prompt critical reaction). Unlike nucelar reactors which function via nuclear fission, these batteries function by capturing the rays from radioactive materials and converting them into energy. The side effect of this is that these batteries tend to be inherently safe because they can't explode and they produce almost no extra radiation (because they're using the radioactivity directly as a power source).

      The biggest concern with batteries such as this is actually cost. Radioactive materials are controlled by the government (although anyone with a license can obtain some through various online webstores) and thus have experienced little competition overall. As a result, prices have stayed high.

      As I've said before, one solution to this problem is to lease the battery instead of selling it outright. Given its ten year lifespan, the costs can be spread out over that time. When the battery is exhausted, the manufacturer can then reuse the remaining materials in a new battery, thus slowly driving down the prices.

    2. Re:Great... by Axe · · Score: 5, Funny
      As one my russian friend, who worked in Chernobyl (as a researcher) remembered, that was the favorite rhyme in there, that can be translated.. "If you want to be a father, wrap your balls in lead foil..."

      All I can say: ouch.

      --
      <^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
    3. Re:Great... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Given the paranoid yet incompetent state of security in this country, every single radioactive battery is probably going to get the bearer stopped by the police at some point. Take a radioactive laptop on a plane? -- Stripsearch. Just wait and see. If Homeland Security's detectors currently false-alarm over the natural radioactive potassium isotopes in bananas - yes, bananas! - then these batteries might get the fisheye from these morons.

    4. Re:Great... by Erioll · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Buy a smoke detector. Those have radioactive materials in them. Wasn't it on /. a few years ago that there was a story about a kid making a mini-reactor in his backyard shed out of tritium from gun sights, and whatever the material is in old smoke detectors?

    5. Re:Great... by WormholeFiend · · Score: 5, Funny

      dude, tritium is not like in the Spiderman 2 movie... its radiation cant even penetrate a sheet of paper.

    6. Re:Great... by DrStrange66 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Now the Energizer bunny will be replaced with the Radiation bunny!

      It keeps glowing and glowing...

    7. Re:Great... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm just curious. How is relevant concern about national security and these batteries rated as a troll? Obviously the moderator has never heard that the NY City police carry radiation detectors now, and that people who have had medical exams involving isotope injection for scanning have actually been pulled off public transit. Radioactive batteries *will* get law enforcement response.

    8. Re:Great... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      anyone else like me fear having anything nuclear in my lap?

      You know, I used to worry about it just a little. Thanks to all the propaganda, there was always that nagging concern "What if I get cancer?" But now I'd be perfectly comfortable standing next to a nuclear power plant.

      Why, you ask? Because I learned a lot more about radiation and eventually learned that it's not as dangerous as it's made out to be. You see, your body is fending off radiation from everything from bananas, to radon gas that you inhale, to Uranium scattered throughout your back yard, to cosmic rays that come screaming in from space with far more energy than anything naturally occuring here on earth.

      Basically, it's a normal risk of living and we deal with it every day. Our bodies are quite well adapted to radiation. (In some cases, people exposed to higher levels of background radiation seem to live *longer*!) Most of the "instant death" or "cancer within months" scenarios involve being swamped with unnaturally high levels of radioactivity. Particularly rays higher in penetration power such as Gamma and X-Rays.

      Trust me, a battery that uses Alpha or Beta rays is really nothing to worry about. The radiation can't even penetrate your skin!

    9. Re:Great... by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah, tritium is neat that way. While in US, "frivolous" uses of tritium are banned, in Europe, that's not the case. So, you get things like these neat glowing keyrings that stay bright for a decade.

      Even air will absorb a significant amount of the tritium's radiation. If the tritium source is right next to you, almost no radiation will penetrate the outer layers of your skin. Even if you ingest tritium-heavy water (so that it can actually do damage), water cycles through your system pretty quickly. The only way you can really get tritium to do major damage without continually reexposing yourself or giving yourself a huge dose is to lock it up in a chemical for which doesn't get lost from the body very quickly and for which the hydrogens don't get interchanged with others often, and then ingest that.

      To put it into perspective, ingesting all of the tritium from a gun sight (a common current use of tritium) would be equivalent to about two years of background radiation. In short, while tritium has its dangers, there are a lot of equally dangerous things out there - including what many conventional batteries are made out of.

      Interestingly enough, as tritium decays, one product is helium-3 - the stuff that people keep saying we have to mine from the moon, despite its very low concentration there ;) Of course, tritium production requires a conventional fission reactor to produce in quantity (you need to bombard a lithium target, and He3-He3 fusion is neutron-free)

      --
      Stale pastry is hollow succor to one who is bereft of ostrich.
    10. Re:Great... by xkenny13 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Unlike nucelar reactors which function via nuclear fission, these batteries function by capturing the rays from radioactive materials and converting them into energy.

      Ummmm ... didn't Chekov do this in Star Trek IV!?

    11. Re:Great... by register_ax · · Score: 5, Informative
    12. Re:Great... by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 5, Funny

      At least it will also kill off the crabs..

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    13. Re:Great... by MarkGriz · · Score: 4, Funny

      "...these batteries tend to be inherently safe because they can't explode..."

      Maybe not, but lets keep that Australian kid away from them, just to be safe.

      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    14. Re:Great... by Rei · · Score: 5, Informative

      Depends. Both U-235 and Pu-239 decay via alpha emission, which is easily blocked by almost anything. The risk for detection is beta, gamma, and neutron emission, which the daughter products can release. U-235 is especially bad because not only is its half life 30,000 times slower than Pu-239's, but the principal gamma radiation released in the decay sequence is low energy (a millimeter of lead should be enough to shield most of it).

      Purity is important, of course. Your typical reactor-grade plutonium has sizable amounts of Pu-240, which is a lot more detectable. Likewise, if the uranium wasn't created with the intent of making it smuggled, it probably has contamination of U-232, which has a very high energy daughter product decay that wouldn't be realistic to shield. There have actually been proposals to deliberately contaminate all uranium produced (to the extent that international cooperation allows) with U-232 to make smuggling unrealistic.

      --
      Stale pastry is hollow succor to one who is bereft of ostrich.
    15. Re:Great... by toomanyhandles · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, troll is a little strong I think, the concern is valid but should be alleviated with some background knowledge :) These batteries won't be detected by radiation detectors, anyway. No pulling you off public transport for that. Not only will the weak beta radiation not get out of the battery, even if the battery does leak, you can pour millicuries of tritium all over detectors, be it badges or geigers or whatever. The weak beta radiation won't even develop film. Now, medicinal doses of I131 or wahtever- those show up loud and clear. I had a friend who had to have his thyroid zapped- he pegged out lab geiger from 5 feet away. Weak beta emitters like tritium that are really almost no concern- I'd like it if they were more dangerous as then you can monitor them more easily (they show up on things like a geiger). The onyl way to "detect" weak betas like tritium is to mix it with some other substance that glows just a tiny bit when hit with low energy beta particles, and then load it into a special very sensitive machine to look for that emitted light. All that said, I'd like to know if they are loading their battery with millicurie quantities or what- if it leaked, that could be an ingestion hazard. I've not RTFA to see though :) HTH. HTH.

    16. Re:Great... by TGK · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First off, the "suitcase nuke" as its called is a fairly unrealistic senario. While the USSR is rumored to have developed some of these portable nuclear devices (Nixon even commented on one that was thought to be in the basement of the Soviet Embasy) they were never created in quantity.

      Now nuclear landmines are another creature alltogether. Both the US and the USSR created substantial quantities of these little gems which, which technicaly man portable, aren't exactly the kind of thing you'd be able to stroll about New York with. (they weight a LOT).

      Much as the Neo-Cons hate to hear it, the major nuclear risk to the United States the shipping system. We're not talking UPS or FedEx here, we're talking cargo containers. There's more than enough space in a cargo container to pack it full of automotive parts with a nuclear land mine in the middle. Liberaly apply some lead sheilding and you've got yourself a covert nuclear device.

      Since a tiny precentage of cargo containers are inspected upon entry into the US, this is unlikely to be noticed by US authorities, who will be too busy stoping cancer patients and bananna enthusiasts.

      Even more ironic is that the shipping system will allow your nuclear cargo container to be delivered to the city of your choosing in just a few days.

      It's the perfect perloined letter. Mr Poe would be so proud.

      The Bush administration is, as the texas expression goes, all hat and no cattle. They're beefing up security where it doesn't matter so that they can look like they're doing something. In the mean time, the real issues are going unaddressed because it's either "too expensive" or "too difficult" to do anything meaningfull.

      I wonder how expensive and difficult a smoking crater in the middle of Chicago would be? Don't think it could happen? Every bomb dropped in Iraq and Afghanistan has left mothers, daughters, sons, fathers, brothers and sisters weaping for loved ones. Eventualy, one of these people we've pissed off is going to have the resources and know how to strike back.

      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    17. Re:Great... by Trigun · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think that you'd have to wrap more than just your testicles, otherwise Chernobyl fall off!

    18. Re:Great... by spacecowboy420 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Come on. Iraq is high profile, but if you want to look at things that the government is doing wrong, there are much more ethically clear-cut things than this.

      Right you are - like displacing millions of Palestinians to make way for Israel.

      Worst.Mistake.Ever.

      Thanks to the colonizing British and the foresight impaired judgement of Truman. Nothing like killing thousands and making millions homeless to piss a people off.

      Yes, the holocaust was likely one of the most tragic events ever.
      Yes, the displaced jews needed a place to go after WW11.
      No, Zionism was/is never the answer and now we see the results. Why did Osama send his henchmen? In his own words, to gain attention to the death America and the west is responsible for in the middle east. I'm a proud American Veteran of the first Gulf War, and I by no means condone any slaughter, but I CAN understand the motivation. If only Bush understood that by killing more we are only fanning the flames.

      If only Republicans could accept critism instead of the policy of: "Deny everything, accuse your accuser". Why wasn't the reaction to 911 "Why are these people so pissed?" instead of "Oh yeah? well we'll kill all ya'll - U.S.A U.S.A U.S.A U.S.A U.S.A!!

      --
      ymmv
  2. Non-lethal exposure by suso · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Before going off and thinking that a radioactive battery would be bad because
    of toxic exposure through its mere presense, please read this Wikipedia article about Tritium, which explains
    that " The low-energy beta radiation from tritium cannot penetrate human skin, so tritium is only dangerous if inhaled or ingested."

    So it might make a good candidate for a household battery.

  3. Oh Noes--The "N" Word! by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 5, Informative
    To help answer some of the imminent "nukular batteries? Isn't that going to kill us all?" questions, here's a sampling from the EPA's webpage on tritium:

    How does tritium affect people's health?

    As with all ionizing radiation, exposure to tritium increases the risk of developing cancer. However, tritium is one of the least dangerous radionuclides because it emits very weak radiation and leaves the body relatively quickly. Since tritium is almost always found as water, it goes directly into soft tissues and organs. The associated dose to these tissues are generally uniform and dependent on the tissues' water content.

    How does tritium change in the environment?

    Tritium readily forms water when exposed to oxygen. As it undergoes radioactive decay, tritium emits a very weak beta particle and transforms to stable, nonradioactive helium. Tritium has a half-life of 12.3 years.

    How do people come in contact with tritium?

    People are exposed to small amounts of tritium every day, since it is widely dispersed in the environment and in the food chain. People who live near or work in federal weapons facilities or nuclear fuel cycle facilities may have increased exposure. People working in research laboratories may also come in contact with tritium.

    How does tritium get into the body?

    Tritium primarily enters the body when people swallow tritiated water. People may also inhale tritium as a gas in the air, and absorb it through their skin.

    What does tritium do once it gets into the body?

    Tritium is almost always found as water, or "tritiated" water. Once tritium enters the body, it disperses quickly and is uniformly distributed throughout the body. Tritium is excreted through the urine within a month or so after ingestion. Organically bound tritium (tritium that is incorporated in organic compounds) can remain in the body for a longer period.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

  4. betavoltaics? by lawpoop · · Score: 5, Funny

    Betavoltaics? I'll wait until this radioactive battery is more... stable.

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
  5. Re:Sterility, here I come! by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Sure, who doesn't want to keep volatile nuclear material near their crotch for several hours at a time?

    ...seeing as a tritium battery would only irradiate you if it broke open, take your pick. Would you rather:

    A) Have a freshly-maimed lap full of delicious, toxic, viscous, burning battery acid; or
    B) Inhale the rough equivalent of breathing a couple months' worth of naturally-occuring tritium?

    Take your time. This one's a toughie.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

  6. Re:AKA by Avian+visitor · · Score: 5, Informative

    p-n junction can be so much more than a diode. A diode is in many cases composed of a single p-n junction, but diode != junction. I totally agree with the poster for calling it that way.

    You don't call two p-n junctions in the transistor a diode. You don't call the p-n junction in the solar cell a diode...

    The term "diode" can also be applied to a vacuum diode, Schotky diode, etc. neither of which is composed of a p-n junction.

  7. Re:Careful... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

    They're probably pretty close to indestructable, so I wouldn't worry too much about idiots. Even if they do manage to penetrate the outer shell, the materials will probably be of a "safer" radioactive type such as an Alpha Emitter. Alpha rays are generally not dangerous as they easily bounce off the outer skin.

    The primary safety hazard is actually the inhalation of an Alpha Emitter. Once inside the soft tissues of the lungs, the emitter increases the risk of broken DNA strands, thus leading to cancer. Note that this is a worst case scenario. Most Alpha Emitters are far too heavy to float in the air, and far too strong to be easily pulverized into pieces small enough to float.

    Note that evidence suggests that the other concern, indigestion, is a non-issue. In all documented cases where Plutonium (a common alpha emitter) was accidently ingested, it was found to pass through the digestive tract without issue. Radiation was not an issue due to the general thickness of the digestive system.

    Compare this to the safety hazards of Alkaline and other battery technologies. These technologies can easily poison water wells, are quite dangerous if ingested, have the potential to explode, and can cause serious burns when in contact with the skin.

  8. Re:laptop use? doubt it. by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 4, Interesting
    nuclear decay is a completely spontaneous process. the only way to get more beta particles is to have more radioactive material. long lasting does not mean lots of power.

    Consider the following:

    You could engineer your batteries to produce significantly more power than the system needs. As the isotope decays, you approach the system's minimum power needs. System alerts you six months before it needs a new battery.

    You could design a hybrid battery--part traditional power storage, part nuclear generation. As the traditional battery is drained, the nuclear battery charges it; best of all, when you're not using the laptop, it charges by default. You wouldn't need a nuclear battery big enough to run the whole laptop--just big enough to stretch that five hour standard battery to a ten-hour battery, with the added bonus of automatic, cordless recharging when the system isn't in use...

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

  9. Sounds promising, but... by Bun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is no mention of the power delivered by the battery - only its lifetime. It doesn't take much to run a pacemaker, but a laptop might require a battery the size of a loaf of bread, for all we know. Also, while tritium isn't all that dangerous, it IS radioactive, and carries all of the regulatory baggage that goes with that designation, so great care would have to be taken to prevent leakage during its lifetime, which wouldn't be easy.

    --
    "Anyone that has ever gotten an idea based on any of my work and done something better with it-good for you."--J.Carmack
  10. Practicality and Sterility by kravlor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Disclaimer: I am a nuclear engineering graduate student.

    This seems like a rather nifty extention of the technology. However, note that the fuel source, tritium, is rather hard and expensive to come by. (The total world supply of the stuff is < 40 kg.) So I see this as a great boon for, say, space probes or other fancy applications where getting your hands on some tritium gas aren't the biggest of concerns on the budget. It'd be interesting to see how they compare to other nuclear batteries that rely on heat from alpha-decay of heavy isotopes like plutonium to generate electrical currents.

    As far as all the jokes about a nuclear laptop battery using this technology causing sterility, note that tritium decays via beta emission (i.e. an electron), with a range in solid materials of a few mm, so those energetic electrons will stay in the battery. Your primary concern would be if you somehow cracked the thing open and inhaled the tritium gas -- then those few mm of exposure in your lungs etc. aren't the best things to have around energetic particles. (And, as far as having to ingest nuclear sources, tritium is probably one of the better ones, since not only does it have a relatively short half-life of ~12 years, but it gets flushed out of the body rather rapidly as it diffuses into the bloodstream/water in tissues, leading to a much shorter effective biological half-life of 11 days.)

  11. Re:Great...for iPods! by j!mmy+v. · · Score: 4, Funny

    This will be awesome in iPods.

    Until your mother launders it.

    And you take a screwdriver to it.

    And it flips you into orbit.

    --
    -- often wrong; never in doubt
  12. Re:next time by tomcode · · Score: 5, Funny

    Actually, you'd keep the battery and buy a new laptop for it every few years.

    --
    f u cn rd ths u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgmng
  13. This is photovoltaics, revisited by just+fiddling+around · · Score: 5, Informative
    For those of you who were not awake in the semiconductor course, a P-N junction is what a diode is made of. It is a junction between an electron-rich zone (the N) and a hole-rich zone (the P) in a semiconducting material. When "something" happens to the junction, the passage to the hole-rich zone is facilitated, making the electrons jump in the holes and generating current. In photovoltaics, the "something" is a photon hitting the junction; in this case, "something" is a radioactive particle.

    There is another way to make a "nuclear battery", which was discussed in the september 2004 issue of IEEE's Spectrum magazine (could not get a link...): by ionizing a bit of matter, it gets attracted to other matter (think static electricity). So you ionize a flat, piezoelectric part that's attached at one end over an unmovable base plate. The attraction makes the loose end of the part strain down to the base, and the piezoelectric nature of the part makes it generate electricity on the way.

    --
    You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
  14. Re:AKA by sleepingsquirrel · · Score: 4, Informative
    You don't call two p-n junctions in the transistor a diode. You don't call the p-n junction in the solar cell a diode...
    Sure you do. Any electrical engineer would. Saying things like "don't forward bias the base-collector diode" or "the emitter-base diode has a low reverse breakdown voltage" is common.
    The term "diode" can also be applied to a vacuum diode, Schotky diode, etc. neither of which is composed of a p-n junction.
    You're correct on the vacuum tube diode. As for Schottky barrier diodes, it's been a while since my semiconductor physics class, but while it may be technically incorrect to classify it as p-n, it most certainly is a junction.
  15. Politics and Energy by sterno · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is going to be an interesting thing to see develop over the next few decades. Nuclear power went from this supposed clean and perfect energy source to becoming the demon of nuclear war, chernobyl and three mile island. When you say nuclear power to people, they get images of three-eyed fish, cancer, etc.

    Having said that, safe nuclear power, which is entirely feasible right now, is really our best option for dealing with energy shortages in the near future. The pebble bed nuclear reactor technology doesn't melt down, provides copious energy, and doesn't emit a gram of CO2. Plus, if I'm not mistaken, the disposal of the pebbles is less troublesome than the leftovers from the more traditional reactors.

    A nuclear battery that could last 10 years would be way better, not only for the users of the batteries, but also for the environment. Think about how much energy you have to use to charge a laptop. All of that energy is primarily coming from fossil fuels. Then when you are done with the battery, you throw it in a dump (at least most people do), and the heavy metals that go into most of those batteries leak into the environment.

    Of course, in order for any of this progress to happen, you're going to have to get people comfy with having a radioactive source a few inches away from their crotch. It might have all the shielding in the world, but it's still going to make a lot of people nervous.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:Politics and Energy by drew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course, in order for any of this progress to happen, you're going to have to get people comfy with having a radioactive source a few inches away from their crotch. It might have all the shielding in the world, but it's still going to make a lot of people nervous.

      Then don't call it a nuclear power source. When most people think nuclear, they are thinking nuclear fission, a la chernobyl and three mile island. Just call it a "betavoltaic power source". Tell people it's similar to solar cell technology, just skip the 'N' word. If they still ask where the power is from, tell them it comes from natural decay of hydrogen atoms, the same thing that makes the hands on their watch glow.

      Besides, if I remember corrctly, beta particles can be stopped by a sheet of aluminum foil. When most people think of radiation shielding, they are thinking af gamma rays, which require much more effort to stop.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
  16. Tritium is too expensive for this by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative
    This thing runs on tritium, which is made in nuclear reactors. Or used to be. The US no longer has a tritium production capability, and hasn't had one since 1988 when K reactor at Savannah River shut down. Tritium currently costs around $100,000/gram. Current production is around 1500g/year, mostly from old CANDU reactors in Canada.

    There's a modest demand for tritium. It's needed to recharge H-bombs. Fusion researchers need sizable quantities of it. It's used for night lights in exit signs, watches, and gunsights. Tritium has a half life of about 12 years, so you lose 5.5% every year as it decays to helium-3. So a new product that requires tritium faces a major supply problem.

    The hazards of tritium exposure aren't high, but some precautions are required. Cleanup procedures for a broken tritium exit sign are as follows:

    When an Exit Sign Containing Tritium (3H) Is Damaged (broken with the release of 3H):

    1. Evacuate the area immediately.
    2. Ventilate the area to the outside.
    3. Isolate the area; do not allow entry.
    4. Identify all individuals possibly exposed to the H-3.
    5. Individuals possibly exposed should immediately:
      • Shower with soap and water (or at least wash face and hands).
      • Change clothing (retain in plastic bag).
      • Drink plenty of fluids.
      • Collect a urine sample immediately and then 24-hour cumulative samples and follow Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), state, or health physics consultant advice on where to send them for analysis.
    6. Call the NRC Regional Office.
    7. Call the State Radiation Protection Program.
    8. Call manufacturer of signs for technical information.
    9. Be prepared to hire a health physics consultant to deal with initial monitoring, decontamination, and disposal of the exit sign and contaminated materials.

      The protective clothing required for cleanup usually consists of gloves and booties. The broken sign should be placed in an air-tight container by a health physics consultant. If silica gel is available it should be placed in the container with the broken sign. The silica gel will collect tritiated water. At a minimum, the broken sign and any miscellaneous pieces should be double bagged and sealed in plastic. Disposal of the broken sign should be arranged through the manufacturer or a health physics consultant.

    And people screw up, even with ordinary exit signs. Here's a Nuclear Regulatory Commission report from 2004:

    • UNPLANNED CONTAMINATION

      USAF personnel in the Johnston Atoll in the Pacific were attempting to remove the "batteries" from an exit sign they believed to be battery powered. During the attempt to open the case, they destroyed the sign only to discover that it was a tritium sign. All tritium modules were broken.

      Five personnel were in the room at the time and all were potentially exposed to the tritium. The Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) isolated the room and the personnel clothing, etc. Pre-cleanup surveys indicated greater than 6 times the normal background survey readings in the room. The RSO double-bagged the sign and tritium module debris. The room and work areas were decontaminated. Post-cleanup surveys indicated normal background readings. Personnel uptake and dose evaluations are currently being assessed.

    So, like the nuclear batteries of the 1960s, this will be a specialized technology of very limited application.