posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 07:23 PM
reply to post by tiagoratto
No problem, mang.
One, you can look in a textbook and get the Psp of tritium direct, or you can calculate it. My book gives a number of roughly 34 microwatts/curie.
Knowing that the definition of a curie is 3.7E10 decays per second, assume every decay emits an electron with an energy of 5.7keV, and from that it's
straight algebra to get a number of 32.5 microwatts/curie, which tells me there's probably some digits to the right of 5.7 I'm not figuring in. But
if you go with the table, it's only 34 microwatts/curie, IF you capture and convert every electron that leaves the material into useful power, which
doesn't happen. It's definitely not 100% efficient.
As far as the 125 microwatts per cc figure goes, it's from the horse's
Slide 9 says - 125 uW/CC. You can also find Gadeken cite that figure elsewhere. That's a goal, by the way, not a current battery. And he
is the guy the article is on about.
Oh, he's also got a Psp table on page 3 with the 34 uW number. That's all the power that's coming out as beta particles per curie. There isn't any
As for the price, if tritium is about $3 the curie, a figure he also gives, and you get 32uW per curie, then enough to provide you with a Watt (if
you're 100% efficient) would be 1/32E-6 curies, or 29411 Curies. Times 3 is $88,235.