On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the small nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products. On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

"The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy. The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years. Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars. What a missed
opportunity.

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the smallÂ* nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.Â* On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

Â*Â*Â* "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
Â*Â*Â*Â* any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.Â*Â* The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.Â*Â* Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.Â* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth

--

On Thu, 13 May 2021 13:16:07 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the smallÂ* nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.Â* On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

Â*Â*Â* "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
Â*Â*Â*Â* any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.Â*Â* The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.Â*Â* Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.Â* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth

"Trillions of dollars" aren't going to make fusion happen. Every time
they think they've got all the problems solved, they find a new one.
Fusion is going to happen when one day they think they've got all the
problems solved and their new test reactor _doesn't_ find a new one.

On 5/13/2021 3:32 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 13:16:07 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the smallÂ* nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.Â* On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

Â*Â*Â* "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
Â*Â*Â*Â* any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.Â*Â* The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.Â*Â* Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.Â* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth

"Trillions of dollars" aren't going to make fusion happen. Every time
they think they've got all the problems solved, they find a new one.
Fusion is going to happen when one day they think they've got all the
problems solved and their new test reactor _doesn't_ find a new one.

I was not thinking of spending trillions for fusion. I was thinking of
cleaning up and reusing the spent nuclear fuel; This seems like a
chemistry and physics problem. Improving the reactors and the control
systems them self. The development of small portable high efficiency
nuclear reactors.

On Thu, 13 May 2021 15:42:47 -0400, knuttle
wrote:

On 5/13/2021 3:32 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 13:16:07 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the smallÂ* nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.Â* On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

Â*Â*Â* "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
Â*Â*Â*Â* any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.Â*Â* The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.Â*Â* Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.Â* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth

"Trillions of dollars" aren't going to make fusion happen. Every time
they think they've got all the problems solved, they find a new one.
Fusion is going to happen when one day they think they've got all the
problems solved and their new test reactor _doesn't_ find a new one.

I was not thinking of spending trillions for fusion. I was thinking of
cleaning up and reusing the spent nuclear fuel; This seems like a
chemistry and physics problem. Improving the reactors and the control
systems them self. The development of small portable high efficiency
nuclear reactors.

Cleaning up the fuel is a political problem. Many solutions are know,
all of them meet massive political resistance.

The problem with portable reactors is shielding.

On 5/13/2021 3:37 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 15:42:47 -0400, knuttle
wrote:

On 5/13/2021 3:32 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 13:16:07 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the smallÂ* nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.Â* On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

Â*Â*Â* "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
Â*Â*Â*Â* any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.Â*Â* The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.Â*Â* Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.Â* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth

"Trillions of dollars" aren't going to make fusion happen. Every time
they think they've got all the problems solved, they find a new one.
Fusion is going to happen when one day they think they've got all the
problems solved and their new test reactor _doesn't_ find a new one.

I was not thinking of spending trillions for fusion. I was thinking of
cleaning up and reusing the spent nuclear fuel; This seems like a
chemistry and physics problem. Improving the reactors and the control
systems them self. The development of small portable high efficiency
nuclear reactors.

Cleaning up the fuel is a political problem. Many solutions are know,
all of them meet massive political resistance.

Indeed. The peanut farmer from GA couldn't tell the difference between
commercial nuclear fuel and weapons reprocessing. He's the one that put
the edict in the the NRC was not to license reprocessing facilities in
the US and killed the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project.

GE had already invested $10s of M $$ and was planning to build a nearly
$1B reprocessing plant for commercial US fuel at Savannah River at the
time...

--

On Thu, 13 May 2021 16:07:27 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 3:37 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 15:42:47 -0400, knuttle
wrote:

On 5/13/2021 3:32 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 13:16:07 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the smallÂ* nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.Â* On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

Â*Â*Â* "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
Â*Â*Â*Â* any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.Â*Â* The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.Â*Â* Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.Â* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth

"Trillions of dollars" aren't going to make fusion happen. Every time
they think they've got all the problems solved, they find a new one.
Fusion is going to happen when one day they think they've got all the
problems solved and their new test reactor _doesn't_ find a new one.

I was not thinking of spending trillions for fusion. I was thinking of
cleaning up and reusing the spent nuclear fuel; This seems like a
chemistry and physics problem. Improving the reactors and the control
systems them self. The development of small portable high efficiency
nuclear reactors.

Cleaning up the fuel is a political problem. Many solutions are know,
all of them meet massive political resistance.

Indeed. The peanut farmer from GA couldn't tell the difference between
commercial nuclear fuel and weapons reprocessing. He's the one that put
the edict in the the NRC was not to license reprocessing facilities in
the US and killed the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project.

Apparently his major experience with nuclear energy was cleaning up
the mess after a Canadian experimental reactor failed. If I
understand the time line correctly he finished 4 months of nuke school
and left the Navy to become a peanut farmer. Nonetheless he and the
press managed to lead us to believe that he had commanded a nuclear
sub.

GE had already invested $10s of M $$ and was planning to build a nearly
$1B reprocessing plant for commercial US fuel at Savannah River at the
time...

On 5/13/2021 4:07 PM, dpb wrote:
On 5/13/2021 3:37 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 15:42:47 -0400, knuttle
wrote:

On 5/13/2021 3:32 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 13:16:07 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with
gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the smallÂ* nuclear
reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit.
SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and
contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope
thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.Â* On the
downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very
long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

Â* Â*Â*Â* "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
Â* Â*Â*Â*Â* any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.Â*Â* The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.Â*Â* Think what could have been
done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.Â* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth


"Trillions of dollars" aren't going to make fusion happen.Â* Every time
they think they've got all the problems solved, they find a new one.
Fusion is going to happen when one day they think they've got all the
problems solved and their new test reactor _doesn't_ find a new one.

I was not thinking of spending trillions for fusion.Â* I was thinking of
cleaning up and reusing the spent nuclear fuel;Â* This seems like a
chemistry and physics problem. Improving the reactors and the control
systems them self.Â* The development of small portable high efficiency
nuclear reactors.

Cleaning up the fuel is a political problem.Â* Many solutions are know,
all of them meet massive political resistance.

Indeed.Â* The peanut farmer from GA couldn't tell the difference between
commercial nuclear fuel and weapons reprocessing.Â* He's the one that put
the edict in the the NRC was not to license reprocessing facilities in
the US and killed the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project.

GE had already invested $10s of M $$ and was planning to build a nearly
$1B reprocessing plant for commercial US fuel at Savannah River at the
time...

--


Wasn't peanut guy the one that was on watch when Iran made American
citizens hostage until Reagan was elected? Was'nt he the one that
fumbled the switch to metric? HE WAS THE ONE that said that America's
good days are behind her and the we should not expect for life to be as
good as it had been.

Talk about a looser throwing in the towel!!

He was really no more than an interim president, kind'a like the one we
have now.

On Thu, 13 May 2021 15:42:47 -0400, knuttle
wrote:

On 5/13/2021 3:32 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 13:16:07 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the small* nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.* On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

*** "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
**** any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.** The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.** Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth

"Trillions of dollars" aren't going to make fusion happen. Every time
they think they've got all the problems solved, they find a new one.
Fusion is going to happen when one day they think they've got all the
problems solved and their new test reactor _doesn't_ find a new one.

I was not thinking of spending trillions for fusion. I was thinking of
cleaning up and reusing the spent nuclear fuel; This seems like a
chemistry and physics problem. Improving the reactors and the control
systems them self. The development of small portable high efficiency
nuclear reactors.

There are answers but they aren't politically correct. Nothing that
actually works (that "science" thing) is politically correct.

On Thu, 13 May 2021 13:16:07 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/13/2021 11:50 AM, knuttle wrote:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the small* nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products.* On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

*** "The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
**** any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy.** The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years.** Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars.* What a missed
opportunity.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/after-decades-decline-us-national-fusion-lab-seeks-rebirth

Nuclear fusion is only five years away. Nothing has changed in fifty
years. It's always been five years away.

BTW, what happened to cold nuclear fusion?

On Thu, 13 May 2021 21:07:30 -0400, wrote:

BTW, what happened to cold nuclear fusion?

Over the last 30+ years the proponents of LENR have wasted a lot of money
proving what knowledgeable Nuclear Scientists already knew - it won't work.
It is right up there with Perpetual Motion machines. However, some people
still believe...
--
Jerry O.

knuttle writes:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the small nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products. On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

"The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy. The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years. Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars. What a missed
opportunity.

One may look back with lament, or look forward with hope.

What "trillions" were spent to kill nuclear energy?

On 5/13/2021 4:00 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the small nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products. On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

"The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy. The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years. Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars. What a missed
opportunity.

One may look back with lament, or look forward with hope.

What "trillions" were spent to kill nuclear energy?

Start with all of the anti nuclear ads that have been run in the last 70
year. What bout all of the groups that spent money to kill nuclear
energy. What about ........................... The list goes on and on.

knuttle writes:
On 5/13/2021 4:00 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:
On 5/13/2021 12:13 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
knuttle writes:

As you sit in the gas line or are looking for a station with gas, DON"T
you wish your car was powered by on of the small nuclear reactor like
those they have use to power satellites for decades?

Hm.. There's only one US nuclear reactor currently in orbit. SNAP-10A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A

The russians had a reactor that deorbited unexpectedly and contaminated
parts of northern Canada in 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-A

The last two Mars rovers have had Pu-powered RTG's - radioisotope thermal
generators, which don't use fission, but rather are powered by the
heat generated as the Pu decays into daughter products. On the downside,
the power is limited to sub 1kw, which won't run a car for very long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioi...tric_generator

Satellites use solar panels.

DARPA is working with Lockmart on the Draco project to test a
new reactor design in space for military satellites - it will use
HALEU (High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium) rather than the HEU
(Highly-enriched Uranium) in the Draco test reactor.

"The demo system won't operate in an orbit where it has
any - even a remote - chance of coming back to Earth."

Might as well wish for a car powered by a Mr. Fusion device.

This research could have been done decades ago using the Trillions of
dollars that have been spent to kill nuclear energy. The whole
Manhattan project took about 5 years. Think what could have been done
in those 70 years with those trillions of dollars. What a missed
opportunity.

One may look back with lament, or look forward with hope.

What "trillions" were spent to kill nuclear energy?

Start with all of the anti nuclear ads that have been run in the last 70
year. What bout all of the groups that spent money to kill nuclear
energy. What about ........................... The list goes on and on.

None of that adds up to trillions, or billions - likely much closer
to a million... drop in the bucket.