NASA Deep Space Fuel Running Out

Terry Olaes

Terry Olaes

I Used to be the [H] News Guy
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
4,646
NASA’s deep space missions rely on a certain type of plutonium for fuel since they are too far from the sun to rely on solar power. However, this plutonium, a by-product of nuclear weapon production, is not naturally-occurring and NASA is almost out of the stuff. The US Energy Department plans on restarting a program to make this fuel but it will cost at least $30 million.

NASA uses about 11 pounds of Pu-238 each year. In recent years, it has purchased some of the material from Russia, but unless it makes new Pu-238, McNutt said, NASA will run out by the end of the next decade. That will leave enough fuel to power only the upcoming Mars Science Laboratory and outer planet missions, he said.
Click to expand...
 
$30 Million versus the few billion we've been sending to other parts of the world?

Why should we be concerned here?
 
I'm sure North Korea and Iran will whine about the USA making more nuclear fuel. It will be a nice slap in the face to countries struggling to make their own nuclear fuel. All the USA has to do is dust off our equipment and use it :D
 
plinko said:
I'm sure North Korea and Iran will whine about the USA making more nuclear fuel. It will be a nice slap in the face to countries struggling to make their own nuclear fuel. All the USA has to do is dust off our equipment and use it :D
Click to expand...

We already make it. We're just don't allow ourselves to extract it.
 
Rebel: Remind me when there's a world water shortage to stab you in the back with a modified water bottle...

On a side note; why do we honestly need it? We should be concerned with getting this shambles of a civilization back in pace before we waste time/money on such things. There will be a time for this stuff, but it surely can't be now.
 
We don't reprocess spent nuclear fuel either (something that would reduce the amount of high level radioactive waste by >90% and reduce the amount of uranium we needed to mine for fuel by >10x). Pu238 would be one of the by products from the process.
 
Run out by the end of the NEXT decade? What are worried about exactly? We are going to run out of plenty of other things before we run out of plutonium for RTG's.
 
Myg said:
On a side note; why do we honestly need it? We should be concerned with getting this shambles of a civilization back in pace before we waste time/money on such things. There will be a time for this stuff, but it surely can't be now.
Click to expand...

Because this kind of basic research can be one of the things that helps lift us out of our "shambles of a civilization". Deep space resources can relieve some of the shortages we're likely to continue to experience here. In the long term, colonization of space would dramatically increase our species' chances for survival. Basic research into things like space travel can lead to spin off technologies we can't even imagine right now.
 
Myg said:
Rebel: Remind me when there's a world water shortage to stab you in the back with a modified water bottle...

On a side note; why do we honestly need it? We should be concerned with getting this shambles of a civilization back in pace before we waste time/money on such things. There will be a time for this stuff, but it surely can't be now.
Click to expand...

LOL
1. 30 M$ is nothing compared to money US (and EU) governments throws out of window every day.
2. We should be reprocessing spent nuclear fuel anyway.
4. There is no water shortage in central europe (which is where I live) and I have water well
3. By the time you would get to my house you would have few .308 holes in your chest :) :D
 
This thread makes me feel bad for the government. They realize they're running out of fuel for space missions, and decide to make more. Sounds logical, right? In response:

-One person complains about the bailouts and greatly exaggerates the drawbacks of those
-One person complains about not extracting the fuel we already have
-One person criticizes the government for caring about spaceflight
-One person complains that we don't reprecess nuclear fuel and greatly exaggerates the benefits of doing so
-One perons thinks proactive action is a bad thing

That's nice guys. I see one intelligent post in this thread so far, which I will QFT here:

Tokamak said:
Because this kind of basic research can be one of the things that helps lift us out of our "shambles of a civilization". Deep space resources can relieve some of the shortages we're likely to continue to experience here. In the long term, colonization of space would dramatically increase our species' chances for survival. Basic research into things like space travel can lead to spin off technologies we can't even imagine right now.
Click to expand...
 
Can anyone point me to a link of resources we have gathered in deep space so far? I would also like to know what our reason is for not using reprocessed spent nuclear fuel.
 
HOCP4ME said:
This thread makes me feel bad for the government. They realize they're running out of fuel for space missions, and decide to make more. Sounds logical, right? In response:

-One person complains about the bailouts and greatly exaggerates the drawbacks of those
-One person complains about not extracting the fuel we already have
-One person criticizes the government for caring about spaceflight
-One person complains that we don't reprecess nuclear fuel and greatly exaggerates the benefits of doing so
-One perons thinks proactive action is a bad thing

That's nice guys. I see one intelligent post in this thread so far, which I will QFT here:
Click to expand...

Tokamak said:
Because this kind of basic research can be one of the things that helps lift us out of our "shambles of a civilization". Deep space resources can relieve some of the shortages we're likely to continue to experience here. In the long term, colonization of space would dramatically increase our species' chances for survival. Basic research into things like space travel can lead to spin off technologies we can't even imagine right now.
Click to expand...

To all of these guys and to both of youTokamak and HOCP4ME:
What do you think is easier?
Expand the same mysery we have been going through since we know each other (a.k.a We as a species) and go out in space and try to carry on with those myseries.
Fix the Myseries and die trying.

You all forget there's something wonderful called free will. An smart person can become stupid and surprisingly an stupid person can become smart. The same goes for constructive and destructive action.

I was at JPL's open house last week. I spoke with one of the scientist that works on the Mars Rover's projects. He commented that most of the general audience within the public is not excited about the idea that the next rover is designed to last 2 years. They all ignore the first one was designed for 3 weeks, and the second 90 days.

I still see human fighting over the same nimieties their fathers and ancestors did, with the same attitude.

In my humble opinion I think going for outer space is easier.
 
Myg said:
On a side note; why do we honestly need it? We should be concerned with getting this shambles of a civilization back in pace before we waste time/money on such things. There will be a time for this stuff, but it surely can't be now.
Click to expand...
Because if you stopped something like scientific research every time we were in "a bad place" two things would happen... 1) We'd still be in the dark ages, and 2) We still wouldn't get out of that bad place.
 
Cetra said:
Can anyone point me to a link of resources we have gathered in deep space so far?
Click to expand...

Here's what NASA has to say about it

In fact, there are so many innovations from, someone wrote a book about them.

Not only does space research directly produce new materials and techniques; often, a solution to a problem unique to space exploration is discovered to solve a similar problem here on Earth as well.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Didn't know about a book like that, or even some kind of innovations, which would maybe be useful in the future. Must maybe do some reading.
 
To all those people who think this is a huge waste of time/money: Why are you on here posting when you could be out helping 3rd world countries with peace and eliminate world hunger? Somebody has to keep forging ahead, or we will all go back to rubbing sticks to start a fire.

Is this the only kind of fuel source they can use?
 
We have to do this in concert with the Russians, we have limit agreements in place that preclude making more at the moment.

So, just make more, its only Plutonium, it's not like we aren't going to need ALOT MORE in the future between now and fusion working. And $30M is literally nothing in the big picture. Congressman fart more than $30M at a sitting.
 
HOCP4ME said:
This thread makes me feel bad for the government. They realize they're running out of fuel for space missions, and decide to make more. Sounds logical, right? In response:

-One person complains about the bailouts and greatly exaggerates the drawbacks of those
-One person complains about not extracting the fuel we already have
-One person criticizes the government for caring about spaceflight
-One person complains that we don't reprecess nuclear fuel and greatly exaggerates the benefits of doing so
-One perons thinks proactive action is a bad thing

That's nice guys. I see one intelligent post in this thread so far, which I will QFT here:
Click to expand...

Add:
-One person criticizing everyone else posts and added absolutely nothing to the thread.

I don't know if number 2 was in reference to my "We already make it" post. But if so, I was pointing out that this "shortage" is artificial. Nuclear reactors naturally produce PU-239., but Ford and Carter made it so that, instead of extracting it and using it as fuel, NASA instead has to buy it from Russia. Makes a lot of sense doesn't it? It's the same problem the medical field faces. Instead of using the radioactive tracers produced right here in the country, they have to buy it from Canada or other places.
 
ShagnWagn said:
To all those people who think this is a huge waste of time/money: Why are you on here posting when you could be out helping 3rd world countries with peace and eliminate world hunger? Somebody has to keep forging ahead, or we will all go back to rubbing sticks to start a fire.

Is this the only kind of fuel source they can use?
Click to expand...

For now, yes. Nuclear fission produces enormously more power than conventional fuels with far less material. A couple hundred kilograms of plutonium can produce more power for much longer than thousands of kilograms of nearly anything else.
 
Pshh...

Plutonium is dangerous stuff. It would be damn funny if the first alien to come in contact with the probe - was immediately killed with radiation...

That would send a really accurate assesment of human civilization.
 
ZenOps said:
Pshh...

Plutonium is dangerous stuff. It would be damn funny if the first alien to come in contact with the probe - was immediately killed with radiation...

That would send a really accurate assesment of human civilization.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the aliens that travel hundreds of light years to visit Earth would be so inept as to not shield themselves from the much more dangerous and and power solar radiation that they be susceptible to radiation trapped inside a reactor assembly.
 
Maybe maybe not.

Maybe they bend space and time to travel, so no propulsion is necessary. Alien is alien - but if you look at suceptability of carbon based lifeforms to radiation - its probably safe to assume aliens would be susceptable in their natural form too.

If they were properly shielded the aliens would be fine - but even if they were what message does it send? Send a 0.9 mass of near critical Plutonium (with maybe a 6.0 richter scale explosion if it did go critical) into space?

Wars on earth have been started for far far less.
 
ryan_975 said:
Add:
-One person criticizing everyone else posts and added absolutely nothing to the thread.

I don't know if number 2 was in reference to my "We already make it" post. But if so, I was pointing out that this "shortage" is artificial. Nuclear reactors naturally produce PU-239., but Ford and Carter made it so that, instead of extracting it and using it as fuel, NASA instead has to buy it from Russia. Makes a lot of sense doesn't it? It's the same problem the medical field faces. Instead of using the radioactive tracers produced right here in the country, they have to buy it from Canada or other places.
Click to expand...

Actually, #2 was referring was in reference to Rebel44's response to your post.

I would be interested in seeing your source of information regarding plutonium production.
 
ZenOps said:
Send a 0.9 mass of near critical Plutonium (with maybe a 6.0 richter scale explosion if it did go critical) into space?
Click to expand...

The device itself is going to be shielded, outside of any deep space probe the radiation will be limited. Also, they're not going to send anywhere near critical mass in one of these things because they don't need to. You can get plenty of energy from a much smaller amount of material.

It is funny that we're even discussing $30M, that's such a small amount of money compared with just about everything the govt. does.
 
ZenOps said:
Maybe maybe not.

Maybe they bend space and time to travel, so no propulsion is necessary. Alien is alien - but if you look at suceptability of carbon based lifeforms to radiation - its probably safe to assume aliens would be susceptable in their natural form too.

If they were properly shielded the aliens would be fine - but even if they were what message does it send? Send a 0.9 mass of near critical Plutonium (with maybe a 6.0 richter scale explosion if it did go critical) into space?

Wars on earth have been started for far far less.
Click to expand...

Bending spacetime is no easy task, I'm sure. I'd think it would require using something with FAR more potential to be lethal than a small amount of plutonium in a probe that may not even get detected.

I imagine that a civilization that travels this far to see what's out here either has two things on their mind. They either achieved peace long ago and aren't looking for excused to go to war. Or they've conquered/destroyed their own world and are looking for more resources and couldn't give two shits about destroying us trying to get them.
 
HOCP4ME said:
Actually, #2 was referring was in reference to Rebel44's response to your post.

I would be interested in seeing your source of information regarding plutonium production.
Click to expand...

source of information? Fissioning U-235 in a nuclear reactor produces other elements. PU-239 is one of them. This is something you can find out just by using google.
 
ryan_975 said:
source of information? Fissioning U-235 in a nuclear reactor produces other elements. PU-239 is one of them. This is something you can find out just by using google.
Click to expand...

No, I meant the "Ford and Carter made it so that...NASA has to buy it from Russia" part.
 
HOCP4ME said:
No, I meant the "Ford and Carter made it so that...NASA has to buy it from Russia" part.
Click to expand...

Quickest link I could find at the moment: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RS22542.pdf
Ford issued an executive decision essentially banning reprocessing of used nuclear fuel for obtaining plutonium. Carter basically killed off reprocessing by having it "deferred indefinitely."

Reagan lifted the indefinite ban, but nothing came of it. Bush 41 and Clinton effectively put it back in place.
 
For a forum of computer geeks there are some here that can't seem to think "multithreaded" lol

I don't understand the whole "why are we in space when there's other shit blah blah" complaint. It's not even a logical complaint. Would NASA scientist turn into farmers or economists or w/e if they lost their jobs? Why can't we work on more than one problem at a time? Some humans are space engineers some are librarians some are bums some sell shoes some make porn wtf.. there is more than enough resources to go around. I personally think we need to spend wayyyy more up there. We should already have a permanent base on the moon.
 
ryan_975 said:
source of information? Fissioning U-235 in a nuclear reactor produces other elements. PU-239 is one of them. This is something you can find out just by using google.
Click to expand...
You're confusing U-235 with U-238.
 
ryan_975 said:
Quickest link I could find at the moment: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RS22542.pdf
Ford issued an executive decision essentially banning reprocessing of used nuclear fuel for obtaining plutonium. Carter basically killed off reprocessing by having it "deferred indefinitely."

Reagan lifted the indefinite ban, but nothing came of it. Bush 41 and Clinton effectively put it back in place.
Click to expand...

Excellent link; thanks.

I guess with the anti-nuclear and then anti-terrorism fears, we didn't want to risk making the same stuff that can be used for nuclear bombs. Unfortunate, yes; I agree. At least, according to the article, we are finally going to start making it again.

I wish people would get over their fears of nuclear power already.
 
My god, scientists are trying to help society and idiots in this topic are bickering over other things.

You idiots talk about fighting and yet your coming into a topic and start them.

I hope one day the bickering idiots in this topic realize that they are contributing to turning our civilization into shambles.
 
w1retap said:
You're confusing U-235 with U-238.
Click to expand...

No, U-238 isn't fissionable. Fission of U-235 sends a neutron into U-238 which becomes U-239 that decays into Np-239. Np-239 then decays into Pu-239. Pu-239 is a predictable isotope and useful for fuel or weapons, but it quickly decays into Pu-240 if left in the reactor. Pu-240 is unstable and unpredictable when using for weapons.

However, I did misread the article regarding the Pu isotope that NASA uses. Pu-238 is what they use (I read that as Pu-239, obviously). It's not fissile and can't go critical and blow anyone up, and it puts out a lot more alpha-radiation which is good for directly creating electrical energy.

However, Pu-238 is not as easy to make as Pu-239. Per wikipedia, (following the source links sholud yeild reliable information):
Today, plutonium-238 is usually prepared by the irradiation of neptunium-237, a minor actinide produced in nuclear reactors, that can be recovered from spent nuclear fuel during reprocessing, or by the irradiation of americium in a reactor. In both cases, the targets are subjected to a chemical treatment, including dissolution in nitric acid to extract the plutonium-238. A 100 kg sample of light water reactor fuel that has been irradiated for three years contains only about 700 grams of neptunium-237, and the neptunium must be extracted selectively.
Click to expand...
 
No, in civilian fission plants, it doesn't produce plutonium in the reaction.
 
We most certainly due produce plutonium through neutron absorption.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top