Why can’t this work:
NASA uses plutonium-238 to generate electricity for satellites in its deep space missions. Using this general approach, can a car battery be continuously charged and that battery used to power a car? Sure, new tech would have to be developed, but is this idea impossible?
@arxiv_physics @physics@lemmy.ml @LHCbPhysics @dianna @physics@scipost.social #physics
Technical hurdles and scarcity of plutonium aside, just think about how many car accidents happen in a major city on any given day, and then imagine all those vehicles involved are running on batteries being trickle charged by plutonium RTGs that just underwent a violent collision. There’s just so many ways for that to go really really badly. Public safety concerns will be the number one barrier to something like this.
It’s a power density issue, first of all, and a security/safety issue second.
I don’t need to address the safety issue, as I’m not really qualified to be talking about Pu-238 or radiation or nuclear physics. Just suffice to say some redneck somewhere would take it apart, and there isn’t much to stop them.
The more immediate reason one cannot replace an alternator with an RTG (Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator, which is really fun to say) is they just don’t make that much electrical power. The RTG used in Curiosity has 4 kilograms of Pu-238, and that makes a whopping 110 watts of electrical power. I have a small 4x4 vehicle with a 1.3 liter engine, and it’s alternator has an output of (I think) 55 amps. 55 amps at 12 volts is 660 watts. And that’s really not enough, if I add extra lights or a big stereo I’d probably need a bigger alternator.
The next question is, “Could one use an RTG to top up a car battery while it’s parked?” And the answer is, yes. But for that, I’d rather use a solar panel, because I don’t want people as stupid as I am to have access to multiple pounds of radioactive material.
I was looking towards tech geniuses to solve the power problem. Solar is a nice idea but with so many cars not hardly ever in the sun, I doubt it would be the option of choice.
Is that somehow different than how an alternator works?
@swab148
I think it’s basically the same, but you gotta get the mechanical energy from somewhere and I suggest this plutonium isotope is the place.@arxiv_physics @physics@lemmy.ml @LHCbPhysics @Dianna @physics@scipost.social #physics
deleted by creator
The idea is in principle fine. Using any power source you can make something resembling a car. From ethanol to gasoline to rocket fuel to a bunch of cats on a hamster wheel and the food you give them.
A plutonium car would be a bit much. For one, cars aren’t using a very small load of power continuously, they use a lot of power intermittently.
Two, plutonium is expensive, we get most of it by literally making it from other elements essentially atom by atom. This makes it a bit more expensive per joule than gasoline.
Three, plutonium is decently dangerous.
Etc etc.
Technically possible, not a practical alternative.
The idea is the same as an EV, with the plutonium continuously charging a super battery that runs the car.
You’re right - the cost has to come down. That happened during the PC development, and we need similar tech geniuses for this.
Plutonium-238 can’t be made into a bomb, but any radioactive material is decently dangerous. Where are those tech geniuses?
Got a better idea? The climate won’t wait.
@arxiv_physics @physics@lemmy.ml @LHCbPhysics @Dianna @physics@scipost.social #physics
Plutonium is just not a good fit for a car.
There are plenty of good ideas already in use or being developed. A plutonium battery is not it, and I’m not sure why you keep asking for tech geniuses to solve your problems, and not, you know, scientists or engineers, who are actually equipped to solve problems.
Remove individual cars from the populace reform society so that those car’s aren’t need.
