4 ms·

- Nuclear-powered electricity source - Touted as a "battery" - Solid state - Can be cooled by heatpipes and ambient air - Can use multiple fuels - Cheap -

- Nuclear-powered electricity source - Touted as a "battery" - Solid state - Can be cooled by heatpipes and ambient air - Can use multiple fuels - Cheap - Small I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that they're commercializing a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (or multiple connected in a series), like the ones sitting abandoned all over the former Soviet Union (and occasionally spewing radiation when some fool disassembles them for scrap metal) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen... Note that it's also touted as "Always On", probably whether you like it or not, because you can't switch radioactive decay on and off.

wmf 12y ago
The article gives the impression that it uses turbines not thermocouples.
rdtsc 12y ago
Unrelated but there is a movie that features one of those RTG as an interesting prop in the story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Ended_This_Summer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Ended_This_Summer
beefman 12y ago
It's a reactor, not an RTG. One reason I don't like the term "nuclear battery". The term is also annoying here because it's clearly an attempt at spin. The cultural situation with nuclear is beyond spin, and requires direct confrontation.
- jddw 12y ago
  Yes it is fission like the article says.
- pjscott 12y ago
  The term "nuclear battery" here refers to the operational model: the modules are shipped out from a factory, hooked up on-site, run with minimal intervention, and then shipped back after several years for refurbishing and refueling. This centralizes construction and maintenance, which is important when the reactors themselves are so small.
  - beefman 12y ago
    I know. I'm arguing against this use of terminology. Nuclear batteries are things, and nuclear reactors are things. Describing your (excellent) operational model should be straightforward and should not require calling a reactor a battery. What you are really doing is demurring from confronting misunderstandings about nuclear energy.
DaniFong 12y ago
Not actually, unfortunately for you ;-)

wmf 12y ago

The article gives the impression that it uses turbines not thermocouples.

rdtsc 12y ago

Unrelated but there is a movie that features one of those RTG as an interesting prop in the story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Ended_This_Summer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Ended_This_Summer

beefman 12y ago

It's a reactor, not an RTG. One reason I don't like the term "nuclear battery". The term is also annoying here because it's clearly an attempt at spin. The cultural situation with nuclear is beyond spin, and requires direct confrontation.

jddw 12y ago
Yes it is fission like the article says.
pjscott 12y ago
The term "nuclear battery" here refers to the operational model: the modules are shipped out from a factory, hooked up on-site, run with minimal intervention, and then shipped back after several years for refurbishing and refueling. This centralizes construction and maintenance, which is important when the reactors themselves are so small.
- beefman 12y ago
  I know. I'm arguing against this use of terminology. Nuclear batteries are things, and nuclear reactors are things. Describing your (excellent) operational model should be straightforward and should not require calling a reactor a battery. What you are really doing is demurring from confronting misunderstandings about nuclear energy.

DaniFong 12y ago

Not actually, unfortunately for you ;-)