SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Fission Space Reactor”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

190 records · Page 11

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2002

Fusion for Space Propulsion

The need for fusion propulsion for interplanetary flights is discussed. For a propulsion system, there are three important system attributes: (1) The absolute amount of energy available, (2) the propellant exhaust velocity, and (3) the jet power per unit mass of the propulsion system (specific power). For efficient and affordable human exploration of the solar system, propellant exhaust velocity in excess of 100 km/s and specific power in excess of 10 kW/kg are required. Chemical combustion obviously cannot meet the requirement in propellant exhaust velocity. Nuclear fission processes typically result in producing energy in the form of heat that needs to be manipulated at temperatures limited by materials to about 2,800 K. Using the fission energy to heat a low atomic weight propellant produces propellant velocity of the order of 10 kinds. Alternatively the fission energy can be converted into electricity that is used to accelerate particles to high exhaust velocity. However, the necessary power conversion and conditioning equipment greatly increases the mass of the propulsion system. Fundamental considerations in waste heat rejection and power conditioning in a fission electric propulsion system place a limit on its jet specific power to the order of about 0.2 kW/kg. If fusion can be developed for propulsion, it appears to have the best of all worlds - it can provide the largest absolute amount of energy, the propellant exhaust velocity (> 100 km/s), and the high specific jet power (> 10 kW/kg). An intermediate step towards fusion propulsion might be a bimodal system in which a fission reactor is used to provide some of the energy to drive a fusion propulsion unit. There are similarities as well as differences between applying fusion to propulsion and to terrestrial electrical power generation. The similarities are the underlying plasma and fusion physics, the enabling component technologies, the computational and the diagnostics capabilities. These physics and engineering capabilities have been demonstrated for a fusion reactor gain (Q) of the order of unity (TFTR: 0.25, JET: 0.65, JT-60: Q(sub eq) approx. 1.25). These technological advances made it compelling for considering fusion for propulsion.

Thio, Y. C. Francis↗

NASA NTRS2019

Fusion-Enabled Pluto Orbiter and Lander

Direct Fusion Drive (DFD) is a unique fusion engine concept based on the Princeton Field-Reversed Configuration (PFRC) fusion reactor conceived by Dr. Sam Cohen of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. DFD would enable the Pluto orbiter and lander context mission and more broadly enable true "rapid transit" to outer-planet and near interstellar space. The truly game-changing levels of thrust and power in a modestly sized package could integrate with our current launch infrastructure while radically expanding the science capability of these missions. Our Phase I was our first funded work on the DFD, with previous work at PSS occurring only under internal R&D. We established the feasibility of our Pluto mission trajectories using straight-line and planar models, including a departure spiral from Earth and insertion at Pluto. We developed our first thrust and specific impulse model using the results of the UEDGE multi-fluid code. Our specific power model was improved. During this Phase II effort, we continued our efforts to increase the fidelity of the designs for the RF, magnet, and shielding subsystems. Dedicated thrust augmentation experiments were run on the PFRC experiment, using a supersonic gas puffing valve. For the first time, we analyzed the design of a closed-loop operation mode and estimated the hardware that would be required for a dual-mode engine. In an exciting new development, we have invented a new thermophotovoltaic thermal conversion method that has the potential to have efficiencies of a Brayton or Stirling system. Our report presents details of these analyses. Our roadmap to bringing DFD to flight predicts that with sufficient support, a first flight unit could be built by 2040. We anticipate that three machine generations are required before this point: a ~1 T PFRC-3 machine hitting new plasma temperature and density levels, a ~5 T PFRC-4 machine with first demonstration of D-3He fusion, and a flight. (The current experiment, PFRC-2, is limited to about 0.1 T). In order to achieve a flight in 2035-2040, the TRL of the supporting systems must be increased in parallel, including low mass radiators, cryogenic propellant storage, and large (>100 kW) thermal conversion systems. Fortunately, many of these systems are dual-use and are required for other technologies including fission systems, so DFD would contribute to and benefit from those programs. This NIAC support and the results of our work have led to multiple follow-on contracts. We won two NASA STTRs focused on DFD subsystems, one on the RF system and one on the superconducting magnets, and our magnet STTR is now midway through a Phase II. We will be receiving a superconducting test magnet for experiments at PPPL this summer. In addition, we won an ARPA-E OPEN grant; this is the first time that OPEN has included fusion technologies, and we are part of a cohort of three alternative fusion companies now supported directly by DOE. We are very optimistic that if we are able to meet our experimental milestones in the next 12-18 months, we will be competitive for additional DOE grants to build PFRC-3.

Propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2014

Current Ground Test Options for Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP)

About 20 different NTP engines/ reactors were tested from 1959 to 1972 as part of the Rover and Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application (NERVA) program. Most were tested in open air at test cell A or test cell C, at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). Even after serious engine breakdowns of the reactor (e.g., Phoebus 1A), the test cells were cleaned up for other engine tests. The engine test stand (ETS) was made for high altitude (approximately 1 psia) testing of an NTP engine with a flight configuration, but still had the exhaust released to open air. The Rover/NERVA program became aware of new environmental regulations which would prohibit the release of any significant quantity of radioactive particulates and noble gases into the open air. The nuclear furnace (NF-1) was the last reactor tested before the program was cancelled in 1973, but successfully demonstrated a scrubber concept on how to filter the NTP exhaust. The NF-1 was demonstrated in the summer of 1972. The NF-1 used a 44MW reactor and operated each run for approximately 90 minutes. The system cooled the hot hydrogen exhaust from the engine with a water spray before entering a particle filter. The exhaust then passed through a series of heat exchangers and water separators to help remove water from the exhaust and further reduce the exhaust temperatures. The exhaust was next prepared for the charcoal trap by passing through a dryer and effluent cooler to bring exhaust temperatures close to liquid nitrogen. At those low temperatures, most of the noble gases (e.g., Xe and Kr made from fission products) get captured in the charcoal trap. The filtered hydrogen is finally passed through a flare stack and released to the air. The concept was overall successful but did show a La plating on some surfaces and had multiple recommendations for improvement. The most recent detailed study on the NTP scrubber concept was performed by the ARES Corporation in 2006. The concept is based on a 50,000 lbf thrust engine (approximately 1 GW) with a maximum burn time of 1 hour. The concept utilized lessons learned from NF-1. The strategy breaks down the exhaust into parallel paths to allow flexibility with engine size and mass flow of exhaust. Similar to NF-1, the exhaust is slowed down, cooled, filtered of particulates, filtered of noble gases, and then the clean hydrogen is flared to open air. Another concept proposed by Steve Howe (currently Director of the Center for Space Nuclear Research) to simplify the NTP exhaust filtering is to run the hydrogen exhaust into boreholes underground to filter the exhaust. The two borehole site locations proposed are at the NTS and at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). At NTS, the boreholes are 8' diameter and 1200' deep. The permeability of hydrogen through the soil and its buoyancy will allow it to rise up through the soil and allow the filtering of noble gases and radioactive particulates. The exhaust needs to be cooled to 600C before entering the borehole to avoid soil glazing. Preliminary analysis shows a small buildup of back pressure with time which depends on permeability. Noble gases entering the borehole walls deep can take a long time before reaching the surface. Other factors affecting permeability include borehole pressure, water saturation, and turbulence. Also, a possible need to pump out contaminated water collected at the bottom of the borehole. At INL, the borehole concept is slightly different. The underground borehole has openings to the soil at special depths which have impermeable interbeds above the water table and below the surface to allow the exhaust to travel horizontal between the impermeable layers. Preliminary results indicate better permeability than at NTS. The last option is total containment of the exhaust during the test run. The concept involves slowing down the flow to subsonic in a water cooled diffuser. The hydrogen is burned off in an oxygen rich afterburner with the only products being steam, oxygen, and some noble gases. A heat exchanger and water spray pulls heat from the steam and lowers the temperature for condensation. The optimum ratio between the two is being investigated, with a goal to minimize the total volume of the water hold tanks. A water tank farm collects the contaminated water. The amount of water produced from burning the hydrogen is approximately 100,000 gallons (not including cooling water) for a 25k lbf engine operating for 50 minutes. Residual gases (e.g., oxygen and some noble gases) can be captured at cryogenic levels with a liquid nitrogen cooled dewar. After a few weeks post-test, the radiation levels can drop to more favorable levels before slowly draining each capture tank and using existing filters. With today's environmental regulations, the NTP exhaust is filtered to meet 10 mrem/year exposure to the general public (at a DOE site) or 100 mrem/year (via NRC when tested elsewhere), when natural background radiation exposure to the general public is 300- 600 mrem per year. The current society feels more comfortable with filtering even lower to as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA).

Gerrish, Harold P., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS2019

The Value Proposition of Multi-Megawatt Electric Power/Propulsion for the Human Exploration of Mars

NASA and other space agencies have been offering stakeholders an architecture for the human exploration of Mars that has remained essentially unchanged since the 1960's. The mission duration and launch mass are the two first order figures of merit that drive the total cost of such an architecture. The options studied to date center on the "conjunction class" or "Long Stay" mission, in which surface infrastructure elements are sent ahead on uncrewed, slow trajectories requiring a minimum amount of propellant, and the crewed elements are sent at the synotic cycle's shortest trajectory, stay on Mars until the next close alignment, and then return to Earth. Total crewed mission durations for these architectures range from 900 to 1100 days, with variations driven primarily by trades between the amount of propellant launched and the effective specific mass of the propulsion technology assumed (e.g., chemical, nuclear thermal, solar electric, nuclear electric). Mars transit propulsion systems assumed in mission architectures studied to date have all resulted in architectural figures of merit that drive the cost to a level of "too much." However, nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) technology offers a "knob" that might be turned to enable a radically different Mars architecture, whose launch mass and mission duration may enable a value proposition more palatable to mission stakeholders. Mars architectures studied to date have assumed an NEP system providing 2.5 MWe at a specific mass of no less than 20 kg/kWe. This has often been seen as obtainable with a moderately high temperature fission reactor. An NEP system providing 15 MWe at specific mass of ~1 kg/kWe, though, could enable a short stay (30 days on surface) Mars mission, requiring only two or three SLS-class launch vehicles and a total mission duration of under one calendar year. However, turning this NEP "knob" would require a high risk development program driving innovation on the order of that delivered by the Manhattan Project, but for a fraction of the cost. Any technology option that might offer such a capability at such a development cost now stands at a low Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 3, would be based on a nuclear energy source (likely fusion), and would require an extremely high risk (and rapid) development effort. The aggressive, parallel path project management paradigm exemplified by the original Manhattan Project might have the best chance of success. An energy source developed in this manner may also have a major impact on the terrestrial power industry.

power↗

NASA NTRS2004

Main Power Distribution Unit for the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO)

Around the year 2011, the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO) will be launched and on its way to orbit three of Jupiter s planet-sized moons. The mission goals for the JIMO project revolve heavily around gathering scientific data concerning ingredients we, as humans, consider essential: water, energy and necessary chemical elements. The JIM0 is an ambitious mission which will implore propulsion from an ION thruster powered by a nuclear fission reactor. Glenn Research Center is responsible for the development of the dynamic power conversion, power management and distribution, heat rejection and ION thrusters. The first test phase for the JIM0 program concerns the High Power AC Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) Test Bed. The goal of this testing is to support electrical performance verification of the power systems. The test bed will incorporate a 2kW Brayton Rotating Unit (BRU) to simulate the nuclear reactor as well as two ION thrusters. The first module of the PMAD Test Bed to be designed is the Main Power Distribution Unit (MPDU) which relays the power input to the various propulsion systems and scientific instruments. The MPDU involves circuitry design as well as mechanical design to determine the placement of the components. The MPDU consists of fourteen relays of four different variations used to convert the input power into the appropriate power output. The three phase system uses 400 Vo1ts(sub L-L) rms at 1000 Hertz. The power is relayed through the circuit and distributed to the scientific instruments, the ION thrusters and other controlled systems. The mechanical design requires the components to be positioned for easy electrical wiring as well as allowing adequate room for the main buss bars, individual circuit boards connected to each component and power supplies. To accomplish creating a suitable design, AutoCAD was used as a drafting tool. By showing a visual layout of the components, it is easy to see where there is extra room or where the components may interfere with one another. By working with the electrical engineer who is designing the circuit, the specific design requirements for the MPDU were determined and used as guidelines. Space is limited due to the size of the mounting plate therefore each component must be strategically placed. Since the MPDU is being designed to fit into a simulated model of the spacecraft systems on the JIMO, components must be positioned where they are easily accessible to be wired to the other onboard systems. Mechanical and electrical requirements provided equally important limits which are combined to produce the best possible design of the MPDU.

Papa, Melissa R.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Testing in Support of Fission Surface Power System Qualification

The strategy for qualifying a FSP system could have a significant programmatic impact. The US has not qualified a space fission power system since launch of the SNAP-10A in 1965. This paper explores cost-effective options for obtaining data that would be needed for flight qualification of a fission system. Qualification data could be obtained from both nuclear and non-nuclear testing. The ability to perform highly realistic nonnuclear testing has advanced significantly throughout the past four decades. Instrumented thermal simulators were developed during the 1970s and 1980s to assist in the development, operation, and assessment of terrestrial fission systems. Instrumented thermal simulators optimized for assisting in the development, operation, and assessment of modern FSP systems have been under development (and utilized) since 1998. These thermal simulators enable heat from fission to be closely mimicked (axial power profile, radial power profile, temperature, heat flux, etc.) and extensive data to be taken from the core region. For transient testing, pin power during a transient is calculated based on the reactivity feedback that would occur given measured values of test article temperature and/or dimensional changes. The reactivity feedback coefficients needed for the test are either calculated or measured using cold/warm zero-power criticals. In this way non-nuclear testing can be used to provide very realistic information related to nuclear operation. Non-nuclear testing can be used at all levels, including component, subsystem, and integrated system testing. FSP fuels and materials are typically chosen to ensure very high confidence in operation at design burnups, fluences, and temperatures. However, facilities exist (e.g. ATR, HFIR) for affordably performing in-pile fuel and materials irradiations, if such testing is desired. Ex-core materials and components (such as alternator materials, control drum drives, etc.) could be irradiated in university or DOE reactors to ensure adequate radiation resistance. Facilities also exist for performing warm and cold zero-power criticals.

Houts, Mike↗

NASA NTRS2019

Commercialization and Human Settlement of the Moon and Cislunar Space – A Look Ahead at the Possibilities over the Next 50 Years

Over 50 years have passed since the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey debuted in April 1968. In the film, Dr. Heywood Floyd flies to a large artificial gravity space station orbiting Earth aboard a commercial space plane. He then embarks on a commuter flight to the Moon arriving there 25hours later. Today, on the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 lunar landing, the images portrayed in 2001 still remain well beyond our capabilities. This paper examines key technologies and systems (in-situ resource utilization, fission power, advanced chemical and nuclear propulsion),and orbiting infrastructure elements (providing a propellant depot and cargo transfer function),that could be developed by NASA and the private sector in future decades allowing the operational capabilities presented in 2001 to be achieved, albeit on a more spartan scale. Lunar derived propellants (LDPs) will be essential to reducing the launch mass requirements from Earth and developing a reusable lunar transportation system (LTS) that can allow initial outposts to evolve into settlements supporting a variety of commercial activities like in-situ propellant production. Deposits of icy regolith found within permanently shadowed craters at the lunar pole scan supply the feedstock material to produce liquid oxygen (LO2) and hydrogen (LH2) propellan tneeded by surface-based lunar landing vehicles (LLVs) using chemical rocket engines. Along the Moon's nearside equatorial corridor, iron oxide-rich volcanic glass beads from vast pyroclasticdeposits, together with mare regolith, can provide the materials to produce lunar-derived LO2plus other important solar wind implanted (SWI) volatiles, including H2 and helium-3. Mega watt classfission power systems will be essential for providing continuous "24/7" power to LLVs will provide cargo and passenger "orbit-to-surface" access and willalso be used to transport LDP to Space Transportation Nodes (STNs) located in lunar polar(LPO) and equatorial orbits (LLO). Spaced-based, reusable lunar transfer vehicles (LTVs),operating between STNs in low Earth orbit (LEO), LLO, and LPO, and able to refuel with LDPs,can offer unique mission capabilities including short transit time crewed cargo transports. Even acommuter shuttle service similar to that portrayed in 2001 appears possible, allowing 1-way trip times to and from the Moon as short as 24 hours. The performance of LTVs using both RL10B-2chemical rockets, and a variant of the nuclear thermal rocket (NTR), the LO2-Augmented NTR(LANTR), are examined and compared. The bipropellant LANTR engine utilizes its divergent nozzle section as an afterburner into which oxygen is injected and supersonically combusted with reactor-heated hydrogen emerging from the engine's sonic throat. If only 1% of the LDP obtained from icy regolith, volcanic glass, and SWI volatile deposits were available for use in lunar orbit,such a supply could support routine commuter flights to the Moon for many thousands of years!This paper provides a look ahead at what might be possible in the not too distant future,quantifies the operational characteristics of key in-space and surface technologies and systems,and provides conceptual designs for the various architectural elements discussed.

Borowski, Stanley K.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Use of Immersion Rigs for High Temperature Hydrogen Exposure Testing within the Nuclear Thermal Rocket Element Environmental Simulator (NTREES): Thermal Soak Rig (TSR)

The Nuclear Thermal Rocket Element Environmental Simulator (NTREES) facility was purpose constructed to perform non-nuclear evaluations of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) system fuel materials and structures within prototypic thermochemical environments. This system has been utilized steadily in its ability to subject test specimens to thermochemical and thermohydraulic environments simulating that of an operating nuclear rocket engine. Fission heat is simulated by induction power and experiments are conducted within a ~1000 psi pressure vessel. Hydrogen is conventionally passed through the heated fuel surrogate test specimen while pressure, temperature, and gas species data are collected at various points along the experiment. In order to test fuel and material coupon samples, a class of test apparatus named “immersion rigs” are being developed and employed to more rapidly test these smaller and more technically challenging test specimen. One example of a promising potential fuel structure, Tristructural-isotropic (TRISO) particles, presents unique challenges for testing of this type. TRISO fuel micro-particles are spheroids typically on the order of 500 – 1000 μm in diameter, and exposing a batch sample to hot hydrogen requires purpose-built special test equipment. Thusly, an immersion rig was developed and successfully demonstrated to expose ~1 g of micro-particles to hydrogen gas at temperatures and pressures relevant to NTP systems for the purpose of fuel evaluation. The rig, comprised primarily of graphite and pure tungsten, houses in its core a batch of micro-particles between pucks of porous silicon carbide (SiC). This approach permits gas flow while simultaneously retaining the particles in place. Herein is a discussion of the design, analysis, fabrication, and testing of the NTREES Thermal Soak Rig (TSR).

Space Nuclear Propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2016

Solar vs. Fission Surface Power for Mars

A multi-discipline team of experts from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) developed Mars surface power system point design solutions for two conceptual missions. The primary goal of this study was to compare the relative merits of solar- versus fission-powered versions of each surface mission. First, the team compared three different solar power options against a fission power system concept for a sub-scale, uncrewed demonstration mission. The 4.5 meter (m) diameter pathfinder lander's primary mission would be to demonstrate Mars entry, descent, and landing techniques. Once on the Martian surface, the lander's In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) payload would demonstrate liquid oxygen propellant production using atmospheric resources. For the purpose of this exercise, location was assumed to be at the Martian equator. The three solar concepts considered included a system that only operated during daylight hours (at roughly half the daily propellant production rate of a round-the-clock fission design), a battery-augmented system that operated through the night (matching the fission concept's propellant production rate), and a system that operated only during daylight, but at a higher rate (again, matching the fission concept's propellant production rate). Including 30% mass growth allowance, total payload masses for the three solar concepts ranged from 1,116 to 2,396 kg, versus the 2,686 kg fission power scheme. However, solar power masses are expected to approach or exceed the fission payload mass at landing sites further from the equator, making landing site selection a key driver in the final power system decision. The team also noted that detailed reliability analysis should be performed on daytime-only solar power schemes to assess potential issues with frequent ISRU system on/off cycling. Next, the team developed a solar-powered point design solution for a conceptual four-crew, 500-day surface mission consisting of up to four landers per crewed expedition mission. Unlike the demonstration mission, a lengthy power outage due to the global dust storms that are known to occur on Mars would pose a safety hazard to a crewed mission. A similar fission versus solar power trade study performed by NASA in 2007 concluded that fission power was more reliable-with a much lower mass penalty-than solar power for this application. However, recent advances in solar cell and energy storage technologies and changes in operational assumptions prompted NASA to revisit the analysis. For the purpose of this exercise a particular landing site at Jezero Crater, located at 18o north latitude, was assumed. A fission power system consisting of four each 10 kW Kilopower fission reactors was compared to a distributed network of Orion-derived Ultraflex solar arrays and Lithium ion batteries mounted on every lander. The team found that a solar power system mass of about 9,800 kg would provide the 22 kilowatts (kW) keep-alive power needed to survive a dust storm lasting up to 120-days at average optical depth of 5, and 35 kW peak power for normal operations under clear skies. Although this is less than half the mass estimated during the 2007 work (which assumed latitudes up to 30o) it is still more than the 7,000 kg mass of the fission system which provides full power regardless of dust storm conditions.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) Development Risk Communication

There are clear advantages of development of a Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) for a crewed mission to Mars. NTR for in-space propulsion enables more ambitious space missions by providing high thrust at high specific impulse (approximately 900 sec) that is 2 times the best theoretical performance possible for chemical rockets. Missions can be optimized for maximum payload capability to take more payload with reduced total mass to orbit; saving cost on reduction of the number of launch vehicles needed. Or missions can be optimized to minimize trip time significantly to reduce the deep space radiation exposure to the crew. NTR propulsion technology is a game changer for space exploration. However, "NUCLEAR" is a word that is feared and vilified by some groups and the hostility towards development of any nuclear systems can meet great opposition by the public as well as from national leaders and people in authority. Communication of nuclear safety will be critical to the success of the development of the NTR. Why is there a fear of nuclear? A bomb that can level a city is a scary weapon. The first and only times the Nuclear Bomb was used in a war was on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War 2. The "Little Boy" atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 and the "Fat Man" on Nagasaki 3 days later on August 9th. Within the first 4 months of bombings, 90- 166 thousand people died in Hiroshima and 60-80 thousand died in Nagasaki. It is important to note for comparison that over 500 thousand people died and 5 million made homeless due to strategic bombing (approximately 150 thousand tons) of Japanese cities and war assets with conventional non-nuclear weapons between 1942- 1945. A major bombing campaign of "firebombing" of Tokyo called "Operation Meetinghouse" on March 9 and 10 consisting of 334 B-29's dropped approximately1,700 tons of bombs around 16 square mile area and over 100 thousand people have been estimated to have died. The declaration of death is very clear for conventional weapons and then the declaration of death due to radiation becomes vague and unclear. This may have been due to people mis-understanding the dangers and effects of radiation when assessing the damage and harm to people initially, but it is also become insidious when expressing opposition to nuclear energy. A nuclear radiation accident can be scary due to the power involved and the fear of radiation release. The International Atomic Energy Agency defines a nuclear and radiation accident a "an event that has led to significant consequences to people, the environment or the facility." There have been 3 commercial nuclear reactor accidents (Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima) that stand out to the public and much of the information about the result and impact to workers, environment, and public can be misleading. Often information is presented without clear correlation with radiation and other pertinent information is left out presenting a very scary situation to affect the emotions of the reader. A very boring but "critically acclaimed" movie was made in 1979 called "The China Syndrome" starring Jane Fonda and Jack Lemmon. The film was released on March 16, 1979, 12 days before the 3-Mile Island nuclear accident in Pennsylvania. The basis from the movie was from a few nuclear plant incidents and in particular, the Brown's Ferry Alabama Power Plant fire. In one scene from the movie, a physicist Dr. Elliott Lowell played by Donald Hotton states that a China Syndrome event would make "an area the size of Pennsylvania" permanently uninhabitable. Real serious nuclear incidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima are often sited to make people fear the consequences of using nuclear power. However, the consequences are at best poorly communicated and at worst fictitiously inflated to instigate social unrest against nuclear power. There is an article being circulated on Facebook with a title "28 Signs that the (US) West Coast is being absolutely fried with nuclear radiation from Fukushima" which focus on mis-information and fear mongering. Nuclear power and NTR are powerful resources that can open many doors for future prosperity and capability. With great power comes great responsibility. Radiation and its effects need to be better understood, quantified, and communicated. A human mission to mars has its own risks of deep space radiation and is considered a considerable risk at 400 milli-Sieverts per year in deep space and 245 milli-Sieverts per year on the surface of Mars as measured by the Mars Curiosity mission. Although these quantities of ionizing radiation are within the astronaut career limit, it exceeds the yearly average amounts of ionizing radiation. Astronaut crews have experienced these levels of radiation before, but for durations shorter than a year, and a mission to Mars could possibly be 3 years in length. There is also evidence that people can comfortably handle higher levels of ionizing radiation where the radiation occurs naturally like Ramsar, Iran when people can experience 270 milli-Sieverts per year. A risk posture that the development, test, and flight of an NTR will meet opposition from groups who oppose nuclear energy must be likely and the impact can be sever to the effort. Active risk mitigation must be taken for an NTR full-scale development project. The NTR design must take into account safety for transport and off nominal conditions. Nuclear fuel element must consider containment of fission products and Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) that may meet less opposition should be considered for safety and security reasons. Even though testing was conducted on Rover/NERVA safely and successfully in the 60's with exhaust sent heavenward in to open air, modern testing of NTR must consider full containment and no release of ionizing radiation to the public and must meet the current requirement of no more than 0.1 milli-Sieverts per year to the public. 0.1 milli-Sieverts is equivalent to eating one banana or a 20 hour plane flight. Good communication with the public and regulatory agencies will be essential to show that all effort is applied toward protection to the public and astronauts. The inspiring endeavor to put humans on Mars to study the planet, search for life, and learn more about this Solar System will be full of risks but it will be worth it. NTR will be worth the development effort if it allows humans to explore our Solar System.

Kim, Tony↗