Are nuclear batteries possible?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Pseudo Epsilon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Batteries Nuclear
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of creating nuclear batteries, specifically focusing on the potential for nuclear reactors and fusion reactors to be miniaturized. Participants explore various aspects of nuclear fission and fusion, including theoretical sizes, necessary components, and methods of power generation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the possibility of a nuclear battery based on nuclear reactions rather than electrochemical ones, specifically mentioning beryllium/graphite shielding.
  • There is a discussion about the theoretical size of a nuclear reactor, with some suggesting that a reactor could be as small as 50 cm by 50 cm if uranium-235 is dense enough to reach critical mass.
  • One participant mentions that a plutonium sphere could theoretically be smaller than 5 cm, but others argue that a reactor requires additional components like moderation and cooling systems.
  • Participants discuss the potential for thermionic methods of power generation instead of traditional steam methods in smaller reactors.
  • The size of fusion reactors is debated, with some suggesting that achieving break-even fusion would still result in large reactor sizes, while others explore hypothetical methods for smaller fusion reactors.
  • There is a mention of the energy required to initiate fusion, specifically in the context of nuclear weapons, indicating that a fission bomb is necessary to start fusion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility and size of nuclear reactors and fusion reactors, indicating that multiple competing perspectives exist without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge various assumptions regarding the density of materials, the need for moderation and cooling systems, and the limitations of current fusion methods, which remain unresolved.

Pseudo Epsilon
Messages
103
Reaction score
0
is it possible to make a nuclear "battery" which works off nuclear not electrochemical reactions using berylium/graphite shielding?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is
Please try to look up those things yourself first. It takes you less time than posting here.
 
i meant fission or something more powerful?
 
That would be a nuclear reactor. Fission is just one type of nuclear reactions.
 
i know that but what I am asking is:theoreticly can you make a nuclear reactor 50cm by 50cm asuming the u-235 was dense enough to reach critical mass?
 
Without shielding and heat sinks... yes.
The reactor measured 39.62 cm (15.6 in) long, 22.4 cm (8.8 in) diameter and held 37 fuel rods containing 235U as uranium-zirconium-hydride fuel.
 
Pseudo Epsilon said:
i know that but what I am asking is:theoreticly can you make a nuclear reactor 50cm by 50cm asuming the u-235 was dense enough to reach critical mass?

You can make one even smaller than that. For Pu-239 with a reflector it can be as small as a sphere with radius ~5 cm.
 
Well, a sphere of plutonium is not a reactor. You need moderation, control mechanisms, cooling cycles, power generation and so on.
 
if it got to 5cm couldn't you just use thermionic methods of power generation instead of steam?
 
  • #10
mfb said:
Well, a sphere of plutonium is not a reactor. You need moderation, control mechanisms, cooling cycles, power generation and so on.

Well you don't need a moderator for a reflected plutonium sphere. And it can be designed to be self-regulating. But you're right that it would still need a coolant system, heat exchanger, and thermoelectric converter to actually produce electricity. I imagine the SNAP-10 reactor, at about the size of a microwave oven, is about as small as one could be practically made.
 
  • #11
assuming break even fusion was achieved how big do you think the smallest fusion reactor could be?
 
  • #12
Pseudo Epsilon said:
assuming break even fusion was achieved how big do you think the smallest fusion reactor could be?

Enormous. The ability of a magnetic confinement fusion reactor to produce power is proportional to its volume. ITER will hopefully be the first reactor to achieve better than break-even, I think it has a diameter of something like 20 meters.
 
  • #13
out of the hypothetical methods of fusion (inertial, z-pinch, laser ect..) what would be the smallest?
 
  • #14
Pseudo Epsilon said:
out of the hypothetical methods of fusion (inertial, z-pinch, laser ect..) what would be the smallest?

There are no laser confinement fusion methods close to achieving breakeven, and even if they were they are even more massive machines than the tokamak. There is no compact way to producing fusion power, as all of the various methods require enormous power inputs in either magnetic fields or lasers to produce the conditions required for fusion to occur. These simply cannot me miniaturized.
 
  • #16
lol, what is the energy needed to initiate fusion?
 
  • #17
In weapons? You need a fission bomb to start fusion, conventional explosives are not powerful enough.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K