Tiny 'nuclear batteries' unveiled

Tiny 'nuclear batteries' unveiled

news.bbc.co.uk

Researchers have demonstrated a penny-sized "nuclear battery" that produces energy from the decay of radioisotopes.

As radioactive substances decay, they release charged particles that when properly harvested can create an electrical current.

Nuclear batteries have been in use for military and aerospace applications, but are typically far larger.

The University of Missouri team says that the batteries hold a million times as much charge as standard batteries.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Wow a battery that holds a million times more power than its standard counterpart.

how safe would this be in mainstream use?

Also they have been used by the military for a while now and its just being 'unvieled'

I read once somewhere that all the technology basicaly exists to make anything ... the problem is speed of communication between devices ( hopefully solved with quantum computer)

And Power source was always sighted as the primary stumbling block.... this battery is penny sized i wonder what one the size of a car battery could power?

ah we live in interesting times...

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

could be big news for the auto markets. i can see these being deal changers with regard to electric/battery powered cars in the future. i hope they handle it right, but i doubt they will lol.

cheers,
AA

Originally posted by anonamousantichrist
could be big news for the auto markets. i can see these being deal changers with regard to electric/battery powered cars in the future. i hope they handle it right, but i doubt they will lol.

The amount of isotope to power a car must be quite significant, hence having it in a car presents a significant risk (such as release in an accident).

Now terrorists can cheaply make small nukes in there backyard!

Originally posted by Phlynx
Now terrorists can cheaply make small nukes in there backyard!

No they can't.

Second line.

If you have a smoke detector in your house, or an implanted pacemaker or ICD then you already are surrounded with small amounts of "nuclear" material.

The headline should have read "radioactive" batteries.

It takes 22 lbs of plutonium or 110 pounds of highly-enriched uranium to make a 'nuclear' bomb.

Iran and North Korea have used thousands of centrifuges for years at a time and can't make enough material for a bomb, so I doubt the microscopic amounts of Americium or Cesium in these batteries could ever be used for anything remotely 'dirty'.

This technology also could be significant for alternative energy applications. For the ordinary household, solar and wind energy are limited by lack of wind, cloudy days, night time, etc., and the main issue (aside from initial cost) has always been storage of excess energy for use at night and other off-peak production times.

Batteries such as these, with a much higher energy storage capacity, might make storage of large amounts of energy easier for practical home-use alternative energy applications. Certainly it will require less space to store a comparable amount of energy; setting aside a whole room in your house or a large shed on your property to hold gigantic battery banks for storage solar/wind energy might no longer be necessary.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
The amount of isotope to power a car must be quite significant, hence having it in a car presents a significant risk (such as release in an accident).

A little quote from another source, ...

What are Nuclear Batteries?

Don't let yourself be put off by the name "nuclear" batteries. You would not be coming in contact with a miniaturized nuclear reactor. In fact, once engineered to everyone's satisfaction, they could be much safer than ordinary chemical batteries. The radioactive elements are fairly rare, distributed as they are across a semiconductor, and would be very well insulated. Unlike alkaline batteries, these wouldn't corrode.

[edit on 10/8/2009 by Keyhole]

This is very intersting. These probably wont be used for cars or houses and such. Similar batteries exist today and have been suggested for pacemakers. Very low current, they just last for ages. They lose power over time due to the decay of the radioisotope though. They are mostly designed to be used in a trickle power fashion, think cell phone charger vs stereo power supply.

As for the nukes in the backyard paranoia, you are looking at microscopic amounts of a material like tritium. Tritium is basically a heavy hydrogen atom. It's used in fusion research. Takes a lot of energy to get it to fuse. So no backyard nukes even if you had a bunch of them to take apart. The beta particles can be bad though, that's the biggest problem with these types of batteries.

reply to post by Quantum_Squirrel


I remember seeing a video with Hutchinson making a battery out of ground up stones and saying that the crystals act as two flat surfaces, that when brought together through a chemical process, create electricity. I don't believe it really worked though. I forget what the effect was actually called, but this thread reminded me of it. A nuclear battery the size of a penny, now that is cool. By the way, everyones avatar on this thread so far is incredibly cool. It's the only reason I even posted! S+F my friend.

Very interesting, this. But, if I understand it, this kind of battery cannot be recharged, right? So eliminating its potencial usage as electric car power source, for example, am I correct? Which is a shame!

reply to post by Rikhart


I think it'll work proper for my PSP.

=D

reply to post by Rikhart


You are correct. "Recharging" would encompass removing the spent material and replacing it with fresh. In essence, they would be considered "primary" batteries... in other words, not rechargeable like "secondary" batteries are.

Wiki thing on batteries.



[edit on 8-10-2009 by RoofMonkey]

What voltage does the "battery" produce?

Milliwatt capacity of one penny sized unit?

I can't find it... this is the best I could do, but it just talks about the componetry. It looks like they have quite a ways to go yet and this was just a hype announcement.

The specific energy density from radioactive decay is five orders of magnitude greater than the specific energy density in conventional chemical battery and fuel cell technologies. As a result, radioisotope micro‐power sources (RIMS) hold great promise for the development of small power sources with dimensions consistent with the miniaturization advances being made in microelectromechanical (MEMS) systems. While a number of conversion schemes can be employed in RIMS, betavoltaic conversion technologies are compatible with the semiconductor manufacturing processes used in MEMS. We are currently investigating the use of liquid semiconductors based betavoltaics as a way to avoid the radiation damage that occurs in solid state semiconductor devices due to non‐ionizing energy loss (NIEL). Sulfur‐35 was selected as the isotope for the liquid semiconductor tests because it can be produced in high specific activity and because it is chemically compatible with liquid semiconductor media. Sulfur‐35 is a pure beta emitter with an average beta energy of 49 keV and a half‐life of 87.2 days. It was produced at the University of Missouri Research reactor via the 35Cl(n,p)35S reaction by irradiating potassium chloride discs in a thermal neutron flux of approximately 8x10^13 s‐1·cm‐2. A 150 hour irradiation produced on average 200 mCi per gram of KCl. The 35S was separated from the irradiated target and converted into elemental sulfur. The 35S was then mixed with selenium and incorporated into a liquid semiconductor device fabricated here at the University of Missouri. Results of the separation chemistry and device testing will be presented.

nextbigfuture.com...

It may be big and clunky... but a Lead- Acid cell can be used for about 5 years if you treat them right and keep them charged properly... oh wait. Lead-Acid cells are secondaries. Not primaries. Never mind.



[edit on 8-10-2009 by RoofMonkey]

wow;
that is amazing;
i hope they start putting it in cars and airplanes;
that would be cool as hell;
and mp3 players;

using these batteries;
we would never have to plug anything in at all;
for hundreds of years

You guys might find this interesting, please do look at my post and links for older threads on related and current situations.

'Trash Can' Nuclear Reactors Could Power Human Outpost On Moon Or Mars

Really is worth looking at what has been going onfor the last 3- 50 years with small nuclear reactors and batteries, and how many are abondoned and such like.

Elf

Originally posted by OuttaHere
This technology also could be significant for alternative energy applications. For the ordinary household, solar and wind energy are limited by lack of wind, cloudy days, night time, etc., and the main issue (aside from initial cost) has always been storage of excess energy for use at night and other off-peak production times.

Batteries such as these, with a much higher energy storage capacity, might make storage of large amounts of energy easier for practical home-use alternative energy applications. Certainly it will require less space to store a comparable amount of energy; setting aside a whole room in your house or a large shed on your property to hold gigantic battery banks for storage solar/wind energy might no longer be necessary.

Nope, this tech will not work for that at all because you can not recharge them. A house with solar or wind power actually always runs off of batteries. The wind or sun just constantly recharges them when conditions are right.

Disposal could be a problem. Has anyone ever thought of what a problem mercury has become since we started filling landfills with discarded miniature batteries containing mercury?