Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
Wouldn't it be nice to not have to change batteries in your iPod, laptop, or digital watch? In as little as 2 or 3 years, we could expect to see nuclear batteries lasting 12 or more years on store shelves.
Interresting...
~Mike
Nuclear batteries have been around ever since the space program was started.
In fact, the voyager space probes, launched in 1977, are STILL transmitting data powered by their plutonium decay batteries.
The problem is current: you need a lot of material to get a decent amount of current. So these batteries will be awesome for long-life applications where current isn't the primary concern but life. A pacemaker is the perfect example.
But to crank enough current to power a laptop is going to require kilograms of nuclear material plus an additional several kilograms of support systems such as the betavoltaic generator and power conversion electronics.
In addition, the fuel they are proposing; tritium, can only be made in nuclear reactors. Thus, it won't be dirt cheap. it only exists in neglible quantities in nature.
And then there is the teenie weenie problem of public support... the public shuns anything with the world "nuclear" in it, even if its perfectly safe. The "five years" of development time they are reporting will be nothing compared to the huge public backlash, political hurdles, and regulatory approvals such a device will go through. i'm guessing at least fifteen years of legal crap will need to be eaten before this device can be bought on ebay.com
Expect to see this device keeping your grandfather's heart going in 2-5 years, but don't hold your breath if you want it to power your laptop.
BTW I am a researcher at the university of toronto.
That is pretty cool.
Just some notes:
The "nuclear batteries" used in deep space probes are RTEGs, radioactive thermoelectric generators, basically a common solid state peltier used in reverse. It is not very efficient and doesn't generate a lot of power for its space and weight.
The Soviet Union made a bunch of RTEGs which they put ON LAND, in remote areas, using cesium. I think it was all for navigation beacons. Scary fact, an unknown number of these deadly devices have since been "lost" or stolen.
"Glowrings" (aka "trasers") are a really cool tritium light source. Not a really bright glow but hey a half-life of 11 yrs. They are make in the UK but last I heard NRC banned imports of the keychain lights into the USA. I believe the gun sights and watch faces were still legal. And I think you can still find the keychains on eBay no problem. And they've allowed EXIT signs to be made with relatively huge tritium tubes.
Tritium puts out very low energy particles, and is generally regarded as safe in these applications even though it can be readily inhaled and absorbed.
As mentioned, it must be made in reactors. I know back in the 90's the US had no source of tritium period, and since it's the fusion stage of a thermonuclear bomb and decays on its own, the govt was concerned. I don't know if they ever fixed this, but the UK seems to have a consistent supply.
That battery won't put out much power. Realize that there is no way to "throttle" this reaction, it generates the same power whether it gets used or just burned up as heat. So consider an ipod that takes a few watts of power, the device will be making that much heat times the inefficiency. So if your iPod takes 1 watt, if it's similar to solar cell efficiency you'd be looking at 10 watts of radioactive decay. Well, it'll always be warmed up. I can tell you my little light tube filled with tritium doesn't give off any perceptable heat so the volume of tritium needed to do 10 watts would be pretty huge.
It's sure to have some important uses- that would be a kick-ass pacemaker battery, for example, if it can just maintain a long-life rechargeable power cell.
Since the late fifties a great deal of work was done with exoctic isotopes
to provide electrical energy and in some cases even motive power for aircraft and rockets. Polonium packs more power per gram than plutonium , also on the plus side along with its much shorter half-life
it only emits alpha particles so it requires less shielding. On the downside it's expensive to make, though with widespread use this cost would come down.
In more recent developments the united states air-force has been doing some research with Hafnium exited with X-rays to produce a controllable
nuclear heat source to power a turbofan engine in recon drones.
Guess I should have read more into it, hehe.
Its cool that they use trtium in watch hands and faces. My current watch has glow hands, but you need the light on first to charge it up...kinda defeats the purpose.
As Oznog said, the nuclear batteries in spacecraft are very basic. A lump of plutonium, a peltier dish and a big heat sink.
It's a shame they didn't know of a good source of Tritium in world war two. Did anyone know that pretty much all the people that painted the dials for aircraft have since died of tumours in the mouth. They used to lick the brushes to get a neater finish.
Tritium is still expensive to produce. As Glyph said, the energy density of a Tritium based cell is far far below that of today's average cell. It might last a long time but it sure as hell isn't very useful. And no one would carry a hot lump of plutonium around with them. Does anyone remember when there was a bit of hysterics in America when NASA wanted to launch with a large plutonium cell on board?
It's a shame they didn't know of a good source of Tritium in world war two. Did anyone know that pretty much all the people that painted the dials for aircraft have since died of tumours in the mouth. They used to lick the brushes to get a neater finish.
When I was at school we were doing about radiation in physics, and the school had a sample of radium for test purposes. This sample was kept is a locked and sealed, lead lined, box, which in turn was kept in a locked cupboard - and we tested the radiation from it with a geiger counter.
At the same time we tested all the luminous watch's in the class, all were at least five times more radioactive than the test sample - it made all the safety procedures look rather stupid?.
Schools are even more pathetic these days. I remember when I was at secondary school and they got the radiation sources out, it was left at the back of the class before we all went in. I happened to have the same lock on a box at home, SO, I opened it. When the teacher came in she was horrified to find a friend and I at the back, and the counter clicking so fast it made a audible tonal noise, we had all the sources pointed at it, and both our watches. She wanted to give us detentions, saying that you've put the lives of your class mates at risk and blarr blarr blarr, making us out to be criminals and that the sources will cause us all to die like a nasty nuclear submarine accident, but she saw sense when she realised that our watches were worse. Well, I think she already knew, but submitted when it became apparent that we were not sheep.
I started there a decade ago, I dread to think how bureaucratic it is now. They probably do not have chemistry classes these days.
We could complain all day long, but the sad fact is that a lot of the gov and country needs a bloody good rework, not just small focused initiatives to meet targets in specific areas. Schools are one of them. When I was in school it was called 'home economics', we learned how to cook, grow our own veg, even how to pack the shopping, oh and how to put a condom on the one and only sex education lesson. kids leaving school these days have not even masters the basic skills of our language, like how to spell and speak properly. Hope I have not made any spelling or grammatical mistakes, that would make me look a bit silly.
In my high school science class, we talked about Mercury one day (the metal, not the planet) and our teacher hapenned to have a 1/2 gallon milk jug half full of mercury. For obvious reasons, he wouldn't let anyone hold it but he let me lift it after class and it must have weighed 10-20 lbs. About a week or so later, some ass blabbed to an adult and the EPA, police, whoever deals with chemicals came in and took the mercury. So, what are they going to get rid of all the chemistry classes corrosive materials too?
~Mike
They took the mercury, because it is a perceived hazard in your country that people will nick it and turn it into explosives. The health risks from mercury are very very small if you take the proper precautions in storage and in the case of a spill. It seems that it is a sad world all over. It would be a sad day when we cannot even teach the young about the world, because the few spoil the freedom and enjoyment of the many. The even sadder fact is that, that day has been and gone.
You can take two lessons from this;
First. What people do not understand, scares them!
In the case of the mercury there is another factor (the explosives), but you can bet your bottom dollar that it was initiated by a parent that "thought" it was dangerous, and then went on a rant and rave. The lack of intelligence installed in the public at large often sporns biased, unwarranted and selfish pitch folk behaviour, by which a load of mother's meeting enthusiasts cause a racket and implore ministers to whip out their ban guns. They threaten things like "I'll make sure your not re-elected next time round" and make out that they are campaigning for the good of every one. They try to criminalise and monstorise innocent people, and they ask that lovely question, "well what if it was your child?", in an attempt to win over the unconverted and demonise the people that stand up to them. You'll also find that tabloids are very good at exploiting this characteristic of humans. Two other classic quotes are "well you don't really need .....", and, "once you have children you'll have a different view", not me you idiosyncratic moron that has an inability to stand up for what is right.
Second. What they don't know about, can't hurt them!
You will also find that a small amount of discretion along with a little maturity will get you very far in life.
Sorry for the political rant, would probably be more at home on the beeb's website.
In my first year BSc. we had a practical on radioactive decay. It was called "simulation of radioactive decay"
We had to press the #rnd on the calculator and generate random numbers and if the number was less than 200, one atom was decayed. There was an eleborate procedure.
The teachers had to set the pacticals this way as the college and the university refused them a giger counter and radioactive samples....
It would have been exciting to have one....although it is dangerous...makes you feel that you are doing some serious science...doesn't it ?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
