[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Nuclear powered rocket



Radsafers:



I've received some excellent information, constructive criticism, and confirmation of my knowledge of Pu.  However it is evident that I did not pose the right question(s) to you nor did I present my goal. My goal is to explain to the public in simple terms, the risk from an explosion of a rocket carrying a non-weapon U or Pu device.  I am assuming two things: 1) Not many oxides (or other soluble forms) would be created in the explosion; and 2)the dispersal factor for the soluble forms is so large, that there would be little or no risk to an individual on the ground. Also, as I have handled both U and Pu in insoluble forms, I know they pose very little risk. I am seeking comments/criticism of these assumptions.  



We all know that the anti-nukes like to say that a uGm of Pu would destroy a city (or the world!), yet such outlandish statements are belied by (as pointed out by a Radsafer) the tons of the material put in the air during the A-bomb atmospheric testing days.  It is ludicrous to say a rocket explosion involving a Pu or U device would be extremely dangerous from a radiological aspect.  The public needs to be told in simple terms that this is ludicrous and why it is ludicrous.  I believe my assumptions and conclusions (there is little or no risk to someone on the ground)are valid, but I want to be sure, and I am seeking your comments.      

    



Larry Grimm, Senior HP

UCLA EH&S/ Radiation Safety Division

*	lgrimm@admin.ucla.edu   Phone:310/206-0712   Fax: 310/206-9051

Cell: 310/863-5556  Pager:1-800-233-7231ext93569

*	On Campus: 501 Westwood Plaza, 4th Floor, MS 951605

*	Off Campus: UCLA Radiation Safety Div, 501 Westwood Plaza 4th

Fl, Box 951605, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1605

*	If this email is not RSD business, the opinions are mine, not

UCLA's.





-----Original Message-----

From: David Whitfill [mailto:djwhitfill@MSN.COM]

Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 1:14 PM

To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: RE: Nuclear powered rocket





Good information...thanks! If we are serious about a Mars mission, a new 

NERVA prototype will have to be built. Being a proponent of research 

reactors I view a revival of the NERVA program as a good thing, but we need 

public support and the public needs to be educated in the risks along with 

past triumphs and failures. Here are some interesting links:



http://www.ans.neep.wisc.edu/~ans/point_source/AEI/sep95/rocket_programs.html



http://www.islandone.org/APC/Nuclear/02.html



http://www.lascruces.com/~mrpbar/rocket.html



=======================================

Dave and everybody,



I've been spending a lot of time lately looking at the nuclear rocket

program at NTS (for another reason, granted), but allow me to set this

record straight.



There was at least one failure, as noted, but this was actually a failure of

instrumentation and not the rocket itself.  It seems that the instruments

monitoring the level of hydrogen in the storage tanks failed, and the tanks

ran dry unexpectedly.  (The hydrogen was both coolant and propellant.)  As a

result, the rocket ran out of coolant and overheated.  However, the NERVA

program was actually quite successful in their efforts to build a nuclear

rocket engine, and there were several designs and many tests that

demonstrated that success.  They even had one test go for 28 starts and

shutdowns, and operated for over 4 hours.



It was really a matter of politics that doomed the program - this work was

going on during the Apollo days, and at the end of Apollo NASA did not have

firm political support to continue with manned planetary missions.

Therefore, chemical rockets were adequate and there was no need to continue

developments on the NERVA systems.



For a good recent review, check out the December, 2002, Nuclear News

interview with Harold Finger, the first joint AEC-NASA Space Nuclear

Propulsion Office Director.  There are also other articles in that edition

that discuss new space reactor concepts.  There has been renewed interest in

the program, so perhaps we may see another one built.



Doug Minnema, PhD, CHP

National Nuclear Security Administration, US DOE













_________________________________________________________________

Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  

http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/