It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is it a Nuclear Powered Satellite ?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   
With all this talk of Denver,Obama,N.A.S.A and the falling Satellite has anyone thought to ask or research wether it is a Nuclear Powered Satellite or not? Were are the experts and how come nobody has tabled this possibility in all these threads?

If so, yeah I would be heading underground too huh!




posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by 13th Zodiac
 


Sounds good...except for the massive solar panel array on it.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:17 PM
link   
That's interesting. I did a google search to find the power source for the UARS. The only thing I could find was that apparently it has a Nuclear Battery with 0.8 kg of Pu238.

Google fails to pull up any other information. Anyone have better luck?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by 13th Zodiac
 


Sounds good...except for the massive solar panel array on it.


Yeah but that's not a main power source I don't think. Well, not according to this anyway.




posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by LeTan
 


3 - 50A Batteries are all that is listed besides the solar array as far as I can see.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Can you provide a source? Thanks in advance.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by LeTan
 





UARS experienced a further reduction in power in June 1997 with the loss of one of three batteries.


From here.

Only mentions 3 batteries and a solar array. First page that I got from Google...

Power supply can mean many things...it does not mean it is nuclear.

A power supply is a device that supplies electrical energy to one or more electric loads. The term is most commonly applied to devices that convert one form of electrical energy to another, though it may also refer to devices that convert another form of energy (e.g., mechanical, chemical, solar) to electrical energy.
edit on 22-9-2011 by superman2012 because: adding on



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Thanks for the link. I read it carefully, indeed it does say 3 batteries.

Where did you get the 50a batteries from though?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by LeTan
 


It's 50 ah...which stands for ampere-hours.

They're just standard Nickel-Cadmium batteries to support the solar arrays.

Source.
edit on 22-9-2011 by CLPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
AH ok, it all makes sense now. OP answered then. Good day!



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeTan
That's interesting. I did a google search to find the power source for the UARS. The only thing I could find was that apparently it has a Nuclear Battery with 0.8 kg of Pu238.

Google fails to pull up any other information. Anyone have better luck?


C'mon..don't quote another "conspiracy" website. GLP isn't even that. GLP is the Weekly World News of conspiracy sites.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by LeTan
That's interesting. I did a google search to find the power source for the UARS. The only thing I could find was that apparently it has a Nuclear Battery with 0.8 kg of Pu238.

Google fails to pull up any other information. Anyone have better luck?


C'mon..don't quote another "conspiracy" website. GLP isn't even that. GLP is the Weekly World News of conspiracy sites.


I have to admit, it was lazyness on my part. It was the first thing that I could pull up that has at least a theory. Noted though, I should look harder next time.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by LeTan
 


hahaha...alright. Was meant as more of a sarcastic "rib" than anything else.

Take care.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeTan
That's interesting. I did a google search to find the power source for the UARS. The only thing I could find was that apparently it has a Nuclear Battery with 0.8 kg of Pu238.

Google fails to pull up any other information. Anyone have better luck?


Pu238 (from Wikipedia):


Plutonium-238, is a radioactive isotope of plutonium with a half-life of 87.7 years. Because it is a very powerful alpha emitter that does not emit significant amounts of other, more penetrating and thus more problematic radiation, this isotope is used for radioisotope thermoelectric generators and radioisotope heater units. One gram of plutonium-238 generates approximately 0.5 watts of power.

Plutonium-238 was the first isotope of plutonium to be discovered. It was synthesized by Glenn Seaborg and associates in 1941 by bombarding uranium-238 with deuterons. Neptunium-238 is made as an intermediate product, which then decays to form plutonium-238. Plutonium-238 decays to uranium-234 and then further along the radium series to lead-206.

Reactor-grade plutonium from spent nuclear fuel contains various isotopes of plutonium. Pu-238 makes up only a percent or two, but may be responsible for much of the short-term decay heat because of its short half-life. This is not useful for producing Pu-238 for RTGs because difficult isotopic separation would be needed.

Pure plutonium-238 is prepared by irradiation of neptunium-237, one of the minor actinides that can be recovered from spent nuclear fuel during reprocessing, or by the irradiation of americium[1] in a reactor. In both cases, the targets are subjected to a chemical treatment, including dissolution in nitric acid to extract the plutonium-238. A 100 kg sample of light water reactor fuel that has been irradiated for three years contains only about 700 grams of neptunium-237, and the neptunium must be extracted selectively.

The United States currently has limited facilities to produce plutonium-238.[2] Since 1993, all of the plutonium-238 the U.S. has used in space probes has been purchased from Russia. 16.5 kilograms in total have been purchased.[3] The U.S. Department of Energy is requesting funding to restart domestic production, but it is expected to take approximately 5 years to produce substantial amounts.[4]


Biological effects of Alpha Particles (again, from Wikipedia):


Because of the short range of absorption, alphas are not, in general, dangerous to life unless the source is ingested or inhaled, in which case they become extremely dangerous. Because of this high mass and strong absorption, if alpha-emitting radionuclides do enter the body (upon being inhaled, ingested, or injected, as with the use of Thorotrast for high-quality X-ray images prior to the 1950s), alpha radiation is the most destructive form of ionizing radiation. It is the most strongly ionizing, and with large enough doses can cause any or all of the symptoms of radiation poisoning. It is estimated that chromosome damage from alpha particles is anywhere from 10 to 1000 times greater than that caused by an equivalent amount of gamma or beta radiation, with the average being set at 20 times. The powerful alpha emitter polonium-210 (a milligram of 210Po emits as many alpha particles per second as 4.215 grams of 226Ra) is suspected of playing a role in lung cancer and bladder cancer related to tobacco smoking.[5] 210Po was used to kill Russian dissident and ex-FSB officer Alexander V. Litvinenko in 2006.[6]

Not only do alphas themselves cause damage, but approximately equal ionization is caused by the recoiling nucleus after alpha emission, and this energy may in turn be especially damaging to genetic material, since the positive cations of many soluble transuranic elements that emit alphas, are chemically attracted to the net negative charge of DNA, causing the recoiling atomic nucleus to be in close proximation to the DNA.


So, you don't want to breath the stuff in. .8 kg, if it gets dispersed over a large area? I don't know what that would mean. Hopefully that amount over many miles of area will dilute it so much it won't matter. I'm curious about the design of the unit that holds the Pu238. These things are supposed to be super sturdy for eventualities like this, just in case. Sturdy enough? I can't speak to that.
edit on 9/22/2011 by LifeInDeath because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 




C'mon..don't quote another "conspiracy" website. GLP isn't even that. GLP is the Weekly World News of conspiracy sites


lol good call.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 05:29 AM
link   
Even if the satellite would have a radioactive power source, it doesn't mean that all hell will break loose of it crashes somewhere. In fact, for those who are interessted, this has happened before and is known as the cosmos incedent. Back in '78, a satellite of the USSR with a nuclear power source had crashed in Canada, contaminating about 124.000 square kilometers.

www.hc-sc.gc.ca...



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 05:32 AM
link   
We'd have something to worry about if it had a nuclear source of power through a reactor but as far as I am aware that is not a current space technology in terms of satellite, due to the weight and size.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Space probes that can no longer use solar power because of the distance they travel from the sun use plutonium decay for power source since the early 70's, on board the Voyagers, Pioneers, and a myriad of other deep space probes like New Horizons going to Pluto. They do carry a significant mass of plutonium.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Great questioning thread OP...its amazing how many of us just trust automatically the PTB because they do not alert us to any danger...think asbestos,aluminium, trans fat in many nations ect ect ect.

Plutonium would not be revealed as nothing could be done.
Just let the peasants die ....and hope they ain't got lawyers.




top topics



 
0

log in

join