Researchers Demonstrate Power Generator for Space Missions

Status
Not open for further replies.

freggo

Distinguished
Nov 22, 2008
778
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]abbadon_34[/nom]And only 5 mph. Might be very efficient and last a long time, but these space engines are SLOW.[/citation]

Not necessarily. Remember this thing runs 24/7/365!
So it would charge a battery pack when the car is not in use.
As for 'cancer'... Gasoline is carcinogenic too; all a question of containment.

Still, not only would it be to expensive but also a security nightmare as terrorists would obviously be able to use the content to create a dirty bomb.

So, back to the terrorists we go to buy their oil instead. How ironic !

 

realibrad

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2007
16
0
18,560
0
[citation][nom]abbadon_34[/nom]And only 5 mph. Might be very efficient and last a long time, but these space engines are SLOW.[/citation]

These engines are not for powering movement. They are for subsystems that use very little power. If they were used to move an object, slow would become relative. If a shot something into space, and this engine kept the sub systems running, then it could be said that the engine is fast. :)
 

ithurtswhenipee

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2010
57
0
18,580
0
"generate about the same amount of electricity as one or two household light bulbs,"

Silly me, All these years I have been using light bulbs to produce light when I could have been using them to generate electricity?!
 

memadmax

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2011
538
0
18,940
3
No, this machine is worse than current technology.

Theres a nuclear powered generator that is called an RTG that has NO moving parts, and can last a very long time as demonstrated by Voyager1. It can also produce as much power as this machine can. And with a little bit of tinkering such as replaceable thermocouples(the part that breaks down) could last even longer. Another benefit to RTGs are they are not actively "fissioning" the nuclear fuel so they don't produce more radiation than they are already producing.
 

madjimms

Distinguished
Mar 7, 2011
90
0
18,580
0
Nuclear power is far superior to other "alternative" energy technologies. Its all about safety & containment, after that you get LONG lasting power.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
640
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]ithurtswhenipee[/nom]"generate about the same amount of electricity as one or two household light bulbs,"Silly me, All these years I have been using light bulbs to produce light when I could have been using them to generate electricity?![/citation]Yeah, you just put them outside in bright light and run em backwards.
 

klavis

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2010
131
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]memadmax[/nom]No, this machine is worse than current technology.Theres a nuclear powered generator that is called an RTG that has NO moving parts, and can last a very long time as demonstrated by Voyager1. It can also produce as much power as this machine can. And with a little bit of tinkering such as replaceable thermocouples(the part that breaks down) could last even longer. Another benefit to RTGs are they are not actively "fissioning" the nuclear fuel so they don't produce more radiation than they are already producing.[/citation]

That is not necessarily true, this new tech might be more efficient, it depends on the amount of energy generated vs the mass of the engine. Such information is given about the RTG engines that have been used but have not be mentioned here. I doubt that they would be suggesting using this engine if it was less efficient.
 

Afrospinach

Honorable
Aug 9, 2012
9
0
10,510
0
Striling engines require moving parts to operate, I wonder if this would actually last as long as the voyager 2 (35 years) RTGs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
green4172 Digital Cameras 0
S Digital Cameras 5
A Digital Cameras 1
Thollupped Digital Cameras 2
S Digital Cameras 1
Vox Digital Cameras 4
T Digital Cameras 1
G Digital Cameras 0
S Digital Cameras 1
R Digital Cameras 3
J Digital Cameras 4
G Digital Cameras 0
P Digital Cameras 1
C Digital Cameras 4
A Digital Cameras 1
J Digital Cameras 4
G Digital Cameras 0
B Digital Cameras 1
B Digital Cameras 6
JMcEntegart Digital Cameras 19

ASK THE COMMUNITY