Nuclear fission plasma reactor?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of using nuclear fission to create plasma for electricity generation, exploring the feasibility and implications of such a system compared to traditional steam-based methods. Participants consider theoretical, practical, and safety aspects of fission plasma reactors, as well as potential applications in space.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose the idea of using fission to create plasma for electricity generation instead of steam.
  • Others argue that while a 'fission plasma' is theoretically possible, it may be undesirable due to energy loss and practical challenges.
  • A participant questions whether the plasma would lose heat to the fission material, raising concerns about efficiency.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of practical fission systems, which typically use solid or liquid fuels, and the challenges of gaseous fission reactors.
  • Some participants suggest that using plasma for direct conversion of energy could be a viable approach, although it requires a heat source to maintain the plasma.
  • Concerns are raised about the containment of radioactive fission products, which is a significant factor in the design of conventional fission systems.
  • One participant speculates about the efficiency comparison between plasma and steam systems if the plasma system could be made to work.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of functionality, economy, and safety over aesthetics in reactor design.
  • There is a mention of magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) generation as a preferred method for converting plasma energy, rather than using turbines.
  • A later reply introduces the idea that a nuclear power system using plasma could be advantageous in space due to heat dissipation challenges.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the feasibility and practicality of using fission to create plasma for electricity generation. There is no consensus on whether this approach is viable or desirable, and multiple competing ideas are presented regarding the design and efficiency of such systems.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to the containment of radioactive materials, the efficiency of energy conversion methods, and the challenges of maintaining plasma states in a fission context. The discussion reflects uncertainty about the technical feasibility and safety of proposed systems.

aquitaine
Messages
30
Reaction score
9
Is it possible to use fisssion to create plasmas, then use the plasma to generate electricity instead of suing steam to for elctricity? Just a thought.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
It is possible to create a 'fission' plasma but that would be undesirable.

Perhaps one is referring to a plasma in which isotopes of hydrogen or other suitable element would under go fusion. The plasma can then be passed through a magnetic field and the charges (nuclei and electrons) separated and recombined in a process known a direct conversion. The current produced by the electrons in direct conversion is used to provide energy to a load.
 
Wouldn't the plasma lose most of its heat to the fission material?
 
I believe 'fission plasma' was a misnomer. Practical fission systems are usually based on solid fuel, where the enriched uranium is in a ceramic or metalic form, or liquid, e.g., molten salt reactor.

A gaseous fission reactor would require highly enriched fuel and would likely be driven by a driver core because of the inherent neutron reactor physics.

The energy loss from a plasma increases with atomic number, Z. Losses from brehmsstrahlung, ionization and recombination would be high to the point of rendering the system unsustainable.
 
Astronuc said:
Perhaps one is referring to a plasma in which isotopes of hydrogen or other suitable element would under go fusion. The plasma can then be passed through a magnetic field and the charges (nuclei and electrons) separated and recombined in a process known a direct conversion. The current produced by the electrons in direct conversion is used to provide energy to a load.


I wasn't necessarily considering plasma for fusion, just plasma to generate electrical current. Obviously plasma needs some kind of heat source or it just fizzles out, and since we _still_ haven't gotten fusion down yet I was wondering if traditional fission could be used as sort of a plasma generator, so it wouldn't use fusion.

Practical fission systems are usually based on solid fuel, where the enriched uranium is in a ceramic or metalic form, or liquid, e.g., molten salt reactor.

Yeah, although it always struck me as somewhat old fashioned. :p
 
Old fashioned works.

A plasma is 'very hot' which also means relatively low density. For a fission process, low density means highly enriched and/or large volume in order to maintain criticality. High temperatures (in conjunction with density) can also mean high pressures, and the combination of high pressure and large volume would mean a large containment system. Otherwise, one has a highly enriched fuel stream, which becomes the plasma and which is driven by a more conventional core.

The other key factor is the control or containment of radioactive fission products, which is a primary reason that conventional fission systems use 'solid' fuel. In fact, in LWRs, the utility is required by Federal regulation to ensure that the fuel does not melt under normal or antipated operational occurrences.
 
Old fashioned works.

True but this is the 21st century, time to make stuff "cool". Another thought, assuming we actually could make this work, and have electricity being generated by plasma instead of stream through a turbine, how might the overall power output of the two systems be compared? Would the plasma system be more efficient than the steam system?

The other key factor is the control or containment of radioactive fission products, which is a primary reason that conventional fission systems use 'solid' fuel. In fact, in LWRs, the utility is required by Federal regulation to ensure that the fuel does not melt under normal or antipated operational occurrences.

So it is theoretically possible, but we don't know how to make it safe?
 
Stuff doesn't need to be 'cool', just functional, economical and safe.

Putting a plasma through a turbine (turbomachinery) would be rather impractical. MHD generation would be the preferred conversion system.

Fission products must stay put in order to be effectively isolated from the environment.
 
Putting a plasma through a turbine (turbomachinery) would be rather impractical.

Which isn't what I meant.

MHD generation would be the preferred conversion system.

This is more like what I was referring to. Where can I find more info about?
 
  • #10
Something just occurred to me. If we were to use nuclear power in space, wouldn't this kind of a system be more useful than conventional solid core designs given the difficulty with dissipating large amounts of heat in space?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K