Synthesis of Pu239: Understanding the Nuclear Reaction from U238 to Fuel

AI Thread Summary
The synthesis of Pu239 from U238 occurs in a breeder reactor, utilizing surplus neutrons to convert non-fissionable U238 into useful fuel. The nuclear reaction involves neutron capture by U238, resulting in U239, which subsequently undergoes two beta decays to form Pu239. The process can be summarized by the equation: U238 + neutron → U239 + gamma → Np239 + beta → Pu239 + beta. This reaction highlights the transformation of atomic number from 92 (Uranium) to 94 (Plutonium) while maintaining the mass number at 239. Understanding this process is crucial for advancements in nuclear fuel technology.
scorpio_wan1945
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Synthesis of Pu239 from Uranium 238.

as far as i know, this process occurs in a breeder reactor and surplus of neutrons are used to convert U238 to Pu 239 as useful fuel, since U238 is not fissionable.

could anyone enlighten me with a nuclear equation for this process?

thanks :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i think i got the answer now...

U238 + neutron -> U239 + gamma -> Np239 + beta ->Pu239 + beta
 
scorpio_wan1945 said:
i think i got the answer now...

U238 + neutron -> U239 + gamma -> Np239 + beta ->Pu239 + beta
Yes - neutron capture followed by two beta decays in succession. Z changes from 92 to 94, while A (239) remains unchanged.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
View full post »

Similar threads

What actually happens to the U-238 part of fuel in a nuclear reactor?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Computation for nuclear reactor systems
Replies
1
Views
3K
I What Are the Complexities of Radioactive Isotopes in Nuclear Chemistry?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Slow or fast neutrons in LFTRs (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors)
Replies
3
Views
3K
MCNP and simple nuclear physics
Replies
9
Views
3K
How does D-T fusion reaction utilize its waste to create more fuel?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Radioistope Power Systems (RPS) and Pu-238
Replies
0
Views
2K
B Why uranium dioxide is used in nuclear reactors?
Replies
2
Views
4K
EM2 Reactor Design: Facts, Pros & Cons
Replies
10
Views
3K
Uranium 235 over Polonium 210 in Nuclear Plants?
Replies
3
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top