Slashdot Mirror
NASA Running Out of Plutonium
PRB_Ohio takes us to Space.com for a story about NASA's plutonium shortage, and how it may affect future missions to the far reaches of the solar system. The U.S. hasn't produced plutonium since 1988, instead preferring to purchase it from Russia. We discussed the U.S. government's plans to resume production in 2005, but those plans ended up being shelved. If NASA is unable to find an additional source, it could limit missions that take spacecraft too far from the Sun. Quoting:
"Alan Stern, NASA associate administrator for science, ... said he believed the United States had sufficient plutonium-238 on hand or on order to fuel next year's Mars Science Lab, an outer planets flagship mission targeted for 2017 and a Discovery-class mission slated to fly a couple years earlier to test a more efficient radioisotope power system NASA and the Energy Department have in development. To help ensure there is enough plutonium-238 for those missions, NASA notified scientists in January that its next New Frontiers solicitation, due out in June, will seek only missions that do not require a nuclear power source."
"I'm sure in 1985 plutonium is available at every corner drugstore, but in 1955 it's a little hard to come by!"
"Flag on the moon. How did it get there?"
Give them a little credit, buying it from Russia was plan B. Our first source of plutonium was from Libyan nationalists. See, they would ask us to build them a bomb, we would take the plutonium, and then give them a shiny bomb casing full of used pinball machine parts. Unfortunately, the Libyans eventually found out and tried to kill us with RPGs. I swear, if Reagan hadn't managed to get up to 88 mph before he hit that photo kiosk, I don't know what we would have done.
The official position of the US Government is that breeder reactors are a potential threat. Bad Guys(TM) might get ahold of fissible materials bound for reprocessing, and THEN where would we be, hmm?
...
Never mind the fact that it's about 1000x simpler to create a gun-type bomb with Uranium rather than creating an uber-complex implosion device. All terrorists obviously have access to the advanced nuclear engineering and simulation capabilities necessary to create a plutonium implosion device.
Despite the fact that they can't refine Uranium...
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
The West has been buying Russian plutonium from old weapons and from surplus stockpiles under the idea that it's better to use it as fuel in a power plant than in a weapon.
They were planning to send it all to America for free at one point.
Nullius in verba
Ion propulsion does indeed work. NASA has used it on a variety of craft to great success. There's just one catch-22: You need POWER to convert into thrust. And where are you going to get that power when you're too far from the Sun for solar panels?
Oh, oh! I have an idea! Plutonium would solve everything!
Wait... ah, crap.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
There are currently 2 ways for US to obtain Plutonium-238 for space flights without buying it from abroad: 1. Use nuclear waste. Laser Isotope Seperation (LIS) is needed to seperate the Pu-238 from the other isotopes. 2. Breed on Neptunium-237. It is also found in nuclear waste, however it is easily separated from the rest. It can be bred into Pu-238 in a breeder blanket in a reactor.
Second, many people should rejoice, this is a golden opportunity to decommission a warhead or two for the plutonium in it.
No dice.
Nasa uses Plutonium-238 in it's RTGs because it's a strong alpha-emitter, and has a short half-life on 87 years. I also believe it's non-fissile (meaning it can't be used for an nuclear weapon).
Plutonium-239 is the stuff they use in nuclear weapons, and it's fairly useless as an RTG generator.
AccountKiller
First we're running out of helium and now we're running out of plutonium.
Our manufacturing jobs are overseas and we're in debt. OK, so we're good there, we're not running out of debt.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
Ronald Reagan?! The ACTOR!?
Former US House candidate, TN-5
How is this short sightedness on NASA's part? They're low on plutonium and have to conserve it for specific missions. Since they aren't able to produce their own plutonium, just what do you suggest they do instead?
When someone says, "Any fool can see
Not entirely true. You operate the reactors and process the fuel rods differently, and I would assume load the fuel rods differently, depending on the isotope you want to make.
If you read the Global Security link I added, you will see. If you want to make predominately Pu239, you go with short run cycles so you don't get buildup of other, more radioactive isotopes, that make handling the fuel rods more problematic. You also want to use more U238 in the rods.
I would guess (as I don't know) that based on the Global Security article, if you want to make Pu238, you would start with more U235 in the rods and maybe run longer between reprocessing cycles.
It's interesting stuff.
Right, the Russians want to dismantle the weapons and not have to maintain them or protect them. Problem is, what do they do with the Pu once the weapons have been dismantled? Answer: sell it. But to who? Unsavory guys who'll make it into weapons, or US Science Guys who promise not to? The Russians and US both think it's better for the Pu not to be made into weapons, so we have the arrangement. If we didn't take it, someone would need to do something with it, and who knows what that would be -- probably not something the US would like.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!