Gamma Ray Decay to potential watts

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential power generation from gamma decay of Cobalt-60 to Nickel-60, specifically focusing on the feasibility of converting gamma rays into electrical power. Participants explore the duration of the decay process, the energy produced per decay, and the practicalities of energy conversion methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the duration of the gamma decay reaction and whether there are decays that last longer than just a few seconds.
  • Another participant notes that each gamma decay occurs very quickly, on the order of 10^-23 seconds, and describes the process as statistical rather than continuous.
  • It is suggested that the actual power output depends on the decay rate and energy per decay, with a calculation indicating that a significant activity is required to generate enough power for practical use.
  • A specific calculation is provided, indicating that to produce 60 W, approximately 1.3e14 decays per second are needed, which corresponds to about 3 g of Co-60 and highlights the decay's half-life implications on power output over time.
  • Questions are raised regarding the method of energy conversion, with one participant suggesting a heat engine driving an alternator, while others propose the possibility of direct conversion methods.
  • Some participants discuss the potential for gamma rays to produce high-energy electrons upon interaction with matter, suggesting this could improve efficiency for generating electricity.
  • Concerns are raised about the practicality and cost of producing Co-60, with one participant stating that the production is too expensive to make the concept feasible.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the feasibility of power generation from gamma decay, with no consensus on the practicality of the proposed methods or the efficiency of energy conversion techniques. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to harnessing this energy.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various assumptions regarding decay rates, energy conversion efficiency, and the economic viability of producing Co-60, which remain unaddressed and could influence the discussion's outcomes.

ANarwhal
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
I'm interested in calculating how much power (in Watts) could be produced (assuming a 100% conversion efficiency between Gamma Rays and electrical power) from gamma decay of a 60 Co -> 60 Ni.

How long would this reaction last? Just a few seconds or longer? Are there any decays that last for a long time?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Each gamma decay takes a very short time (order 10^-23 seconds iirc) ... it is a statistical rather than a continuous process.

You can work out the rates from the mean lives of the processes. Imagine you are driving a sensitive waterwheel with raindrops.
 
As Simon mentioned, the actual power will depend upon the activity, which is decays per second. Multiply this by the energy per decay and you have energy per second, which is power. You'll find it takes an enormous activity to generate enough power to light up an electricl light bulb.
 
Cobalt 60 decay emits two 1.3 MeV gammas and a 0.3 MeV beta. This is 4.5e-13 J per decay. To produce 60 W, you would thus need 1.3e14 decays per second. This is equal to 3615 Ci, or about 3 g of Co-60. Co-60 has a half-life of 5.2 years which means if the bulb initially produced 60 W, after 5.2 years it would produce 30 W, after 10.4 years - 15 W, etc.

Note that this 60 W cobalt-60 lightbulb would cause a dose of 500 R/hr (fatal) at a distance of 10 ft if unshielded. However with a 5 inch thick leaded glass shield surrounding the bulb, this could be reduced to 0.1 R/hr at 10 ft.

(using the Rad Pro Calculator here: http://www.radprocalculator.com/Gamma.aspx )
 
Last edited:
How were you planning to do the energy conversion? I could only think of using a heat engine driving an alternator, which would not necessarily be very efficient. Is there some 'direct conversion' method?
 
When the gamma rays hit matter, they can produce high-energetic electrons. Maybe the efficiency can be improved if they are used directly to generate high voltage/low current, which is then converted to the needs of a lamp. In addition, the heat of the impact site can be used.
The production of 60Co is too expensive to make this practical in any way.
 
mfb said:
When the gamma rays hit matter, they can produce high-energetic electrons. Maybe the efficiency can be improved if they are used directly to generate high voltage/low current, which is then converted to the needs of a lamp. In addition, the heat of the impact site can be used.
The production of 60Co is too expensive to make this practical in any way.

There's the rub, I'm afraid. It's the actual details that would have to be right and I don't think a method exists yet. As far as I know, the only methods available (used in spacecraft ) involve using a nuclear source for heat and then thermoelectric junctions - not very efficient.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K