Slashdot Mirror
NASA Successfully Tests New Nuclear Reactor For Future Space Travelers (npr.org)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR: NASA and the U.S. Department of Energy say they have successfully tested a new type of nuclear reactor that could one day provide juice to colonies on other worlds. The reactor can power several homes and appears able to operate in harsh environments. The new reactor uses more-conventional uranium fuel. Using a "core" about the size of a paper towel roll, the reactor can turn pistons that can run a generator. The generator can put out about 10 kilowatts of electrical power -- enough to run a few small homes. Scientists believe it could run continuously for a decade or so, making deep space travel a lot simpler. They also gave it a catchy acronym: KRUSTY, which stands for Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY.
To see if it actually worked, scientists tested KRUSTY out in the Nevada desert on America's old nuclear test range. They put KRUSTY through its paces, culminating in a 28-hour test at full power. The team also simulated failures in KRUSTY's reactor components to show it wouldn't result in a meltdown on Mars. KRUSTY may find its way onto future space probes. Researchers say they might use an ensemble of four or five of the reactors to power colonies on the moon (which has 14-day nights, when the sun isn't available) or Mars.
To see if it actually worked, scientists tested KRUSTY out in the Nevada desert on America's old nuclear test range. They put KRUSTY through its paces, culminating in a 28-hour test at full power. The team also simulated failures in KRUSTY's reactor components to show it wouldn't result in a meltdown on Mars. KRUSTY may find its way onto future space probes. Researchers say they might use an ensemble of four or five of the reactors to power colonies on the moon (which has 14-day nights, when the sun isn't available) or Mars.
It's nicely at a power point where it could power a small apartment building and recharge all the electric vehicles fully overnight. If it were 30KW it could even power a highway capable SUV. While one might worry about crashes, remember these thermo-nuclear-electric power packs on sattelites are hardened to survive a rocket explosion and hard re-entry.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
This is impressive but with the NASA designed EmDrive this will not be needed in the future when we colonize other stars and planets.
I find it amusing they call nuclear "old-fashioned", when Fission was only discovered in 1938... granted photovoltaic may be newer, but we've known about solar and wind power (and combustion) in varying methods of harvest for millennia.
the real at&t mix
there's a difference between peak load and average load. your furnace does not run all the time. Not even most of the time. Moreover this thing is going to give off much more than 10KW of heat in addition to the electricity. So it is the furnace too. Examine your power bill. A typical 1 bedroom electric bill is $50/month in states with cheap electricity and taxes. that's less than 500KW/hours per month. not per day
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
It's so safe, even Homer could install it.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The idea of the neighborhood reactors. They were to be powered by uranium hydride and be the size of a garden shed. Did these ever come to fruition? https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/nov/09/miniature-nuclear-reactors-los-alamos
I use about 75KWh a month in electricity, without even caring to switch lights off and having a PC, router on 24/7. Could easily go off the grid if I wanted.
The rest of the energy I use is from burning bits of timber and the odd 11kg drum of Butane (about 1 every month). I imagine this reactor would produce a good bit of waste heat that can be recovered in addition to the electricity
Use ganged tesla turbines. The problem with the tesla turbine is that it is only efficient in a very narrow speed/load range, but that's trivially solved by using multiples. Using multiples means backup/redundancy, and tesla turbines have only one moving part.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Perhaps you missed the news where SpaceX is going to land cargo on Mars in 2022 and humans will arrive soon after. They will need power.
I'll notify NASA immediately to stop work on this and switch to your design.
NASA monitors Slashdot at +5 to find the right way to do things. NASA's management figured out years ago that the science and engineering PhDs have nothing on a Slashdotter.
See, all those hours in the company's basement telling people, "Have you tried turning off and on again?" allows them to think big thought. And years of experience coding Javascript makes a Slashdotter an expert on space travel.
The only nuclear reactor endorsed by a clown.
Your house consumes more power, is less efficient, and has more creature comforts than the first homes on Mars will have.
You could get your house down to 10KW and with a battery for smoothing a 10KW generator would probably take care of your genset-only 14KW load.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Well, one of the things that needs development before we do a space colony is a long-term power supply.
So, absent NASA wasting money developing this, we won't ever reach the point of needing to worry about powering a space colony.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I find it amazing that in this day and age we still have not figured out how to pull energy directly from the source. A nuclear reactor is just a fancy steam engine that uses hot rocks to generate steam. Surely there is a way to harness the radiation as an energy source that doesn't involve using the waste heat.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
Very true. The first homes in Mars will likely have to use 40" televisions instead of the 65" ones that are more commonly found on Earth homes. 10KW should be plenty for a Mars home as long as you don't take too many hot water baths. Of course, you could use the radiation to warm the water.
We are nowhere near the point where we need to worry about powering a space colony, so why is NASA wasting money on this part ?
Because if you don't have an adequate power system you NEVER will have a space colony. It's job number one. If you don't have adequate power system there is no mission. Literally every other part of the mission depends on it. Any form of transportation is fundamentally contingent upon having a reliable power supply with a power to weight (and volume) ratio adequate to the mission parameters. With a sufficiently small and powerful energy supply, nearly any mission is possible. Without it no mission is possible.
Sure, but it's hardly the most difficult or pressing issue.
Umm, yeah it pretty much is the biggest issue. Literally every mission depends on having an power supply with usable power, weight, and volume parameters. EVERY mission. Manned or unmanned - it doesn't matter. EVERY mission requires a power supply.
Developing a rocket and lander so we can put heavy objects safely on the surface of the Moon/Mars is a bigger challenge.
There is no point in launching stuff into space unless you can power the stuff once it is in space. They go hand in hand. There are missions that are literally impossible with the currently available power supplies. To do those missions you need a better power supply. Launching into orbit could be literally free and if you don't have a power supply adequate to the mission parameters there still will be no mission.
Also, without a rocket, a power supply is useless. A rocket without a power supply can be used for plenty of other missions.
Really? Name one mission that doesn't require a power supply. A mission needs a power supply to be a mission. It also needs a rocket to get to where the mission needs to go. It's not an either/or proposition. You need both.
shielded from the sun space is pretty darn cold
No, it isn't. When you're in that vacuum, where are you going to dump your heat? How efficiently can you radiate it into the void? (Hint: not very.)