[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[2]: Alternative isotopes in RTGs?
- To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (IPM Return requested), Scott.D.Kniffin.1@gsfc.nasa.gov (IPM Return requested)
- Subject: Re[2]: Alternative isotopes in RTGs?
- From: Kim D Merritt <kdmerri@sandia.gov>
- Date: 14 Oct 1997 10:23:54 -0600
- Alternate-Recipient: Allowed
- Conversion: Allowed
- Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited
- Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text
- Priority: normal
- X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 )
- X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=USDOE/; 02EEF34439C9A708-mtaSNL]
- X400-Originator: kdmerri@sandia.gov
- X400-Received: by mta mtaSNL in /c=US/admd= /prmd=USDOE/; Relayed; 14 Oct 1997 10:23:54 -0600
- X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=USDOE/; Relayed; 14 Oct 1997 10:23:54 -0600
- X400-Recipients: non-disclosure;
<Pu-239 with its 24,100 year half life has a few more advantages over other
isotopes. The alpha decay energy is always over 5MeV (more eficient heat
production), no beta emission (less chance for creating a static
electricity problem), the highest gamma energy is of low (weak) probability
(less
shielding = less weight), and the spontaneous fission probability is
incredibly small (very very weak). In fact the mission neutron
flux for the parts nearest the RTG's is only on the order of 10^9.
Quite small really.>
Aren't the RTG's powered by Pu238 though?
Kim