SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Artificial intelligence will be deployed increasingly in more systems that affect public health, safety, and welfare. These systems will better utilize scarce resources; prevent disasters; and increase safety, reliability, comfort, and convenience. Despite the technological challenges and public fears, these systems will improve the quality of life of millions of people worldwide.
There are clear advantages of development of a Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) for a crewed mission to Mars. NTP for in-space propulsion enables more ambitious space missions by providing high thrust at high specific impulse ((is) 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 to Mars and beyond. 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. The public often associates the 'nuclear' word with weapons of mass destruction. The development NTP is at risk due to unwarranted public fears and clear honest communication of nuclear safety will be critical to the success of the development of the NTP technology. Reducing cost to NTP development is critical to its acceptance and funding. In the past, highly inflated cost estimates of a full-scale development nuclear engine due to Category I nuclear security requirements and costly regulatory requirements have put the NTP technology as a low priority. Innovative approaches utilizing low enriched uranium (LEU). Even though NTP can be a small source of radiation to the crew, NTP can facilitate significant reduction of crew exposure to solar and cosmic radiation by reducing trip times by 3-4 months. Current Human Mars Mission (HMM) trajectories with conventional propulsion systems and fuel-efficient transfer orbits exceed astronaut radiation exposure limits. Utilizing extra propellant from one additional SLS launch and available energy in the NTP fuel, HMM radiation exposure can be reduced significantly.
The era of atmospheric testing defies a simple description. Beginning with the goal of proving fission, the United States’ test program grew in complexity as scientists explored thermonuclear reactions, met the military demand for a variety of weapons for an increasing number of delivery platforms, and reacted to the ever-growing public fear of fallout. And, of course, political considerations were always present, first in the prosecution of World War II and later in the Cold War. To understand the atmospheric test program, then, is to understand how science, politics, and the public shaped our society in ways that are still difficult to fully understand.
As the frequency and duration of grid outages increase, backup power systems are becoming more important for ensuring that critical infrastructure continues to provide essential services. Most facilities rely on diesel generators, which may be ineffective during long outages owing to limited fuel supplies and high generator failure rates. Distributed energy resources such as solar, storage, and combined-heat-and-power systems, coupled with on-site biofuel production, offer an alternative source of on-site generation that can provide both cost savings and resilience (i.e., the ability to respond to catastrophic events with longer-term consequences). A mixed-integer linear program minimizes costs and maximizes resilience at a wastewater treatment plant in Wilmington, North Carolina. We find that the plant can reduce life-cycle energy costs by 3.1% through the installation of a hybrid combined-heat-and-power, photovoltaic, and storage system. When paired with existing diesel generators, this system can sustain full load for seven days while saving $664,000 over 25 years and reducing diesel fuel use by 48% compared with the diesel-only solution. This analysis informed a decision by the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority to allocate funds for the implementation of a combined-heat-and-power system at the wastewater treatment plant in fiscal year 2023. Finally, the benefits of deploying hybrid combined-heat-and-power technologies and the utilization of on-site biofuel production extend, on a national scale, to thousands of wastewater treatment facilities and other types of critical infrastructure.
One of the most profound changes in our perspective of the solar system resulting from the first quarter century of planetary exploration by spacecraft is the recognition that planets, including Earth, were bombarded by cosmic projectiles for 4.5 aeons and continue to be bombarded today. Although the planetary cratering rate is much lower now than it was during the first 0.5 aeons, sizeable Earth-approaching asteroids and comets continue to hit the Earth at a rate that poses a finite risk to civilization. The evolution of this planetary perspective on impact cratering is gradual over the last two decades. It took explorations of Mars and Mercury by early Mariner spacecraft and of the outer solar system by the Voyagers to reveal the significance of asteroidal and cometary impacts in shaping the morphologies and even chemical compositions of the planets. An unsettling implication of the new perspective is addressed: the risk to human civilization. Serious scientific attention was given to this issue in July 1981 at a NASA-sponsored Spacewatch Workshop in Snowmass, Colorado. The basic conclusion of the 1981 NASA sponsored workshop still stands: the risk that civilization might be destroyed by impact with an as-yet-undiscovered asteroid or comet exceeds risk levels that are sometimes deemed unacceptable by modern societies in other contexts. Yet these impact risks have gone almost undiscussed and undebated. The tentative quantitative assessment by some members of the 1981 workshop was that each year, civilization is threatened with destruction with a probability of about 1 in 100,000. The enormous spread in risk levels deemed by the public to be at the threshold of acceptability derives from a host of psychological factors that were widely discussed in the risk assessment literature. Slovic shows that public fears of hazards are greatest for hazards that are uncontrollable, involuntary, fatal, dreadful, globally catastrophic, and which have consequences that seem inequitable, especially if they affect future generations.
The fundamental capability of Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) is game changing for space exploration. A first generation Nuclear Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (NCPS) based on NTP could provide high thrust at a specific impulse above 900 s, roughly double that of state of the art chemical engines. Characteristics of fission and NTP indicate that useful first generation systems will provide a foundation for future systems with extremely high performance. The role of the NCPS in the development of advanced nuclear propulsion systems could be analogous to the role of the DC-3 in the development of advanced aviation. Progress made under the NCPS project could help enable both advanced NTP and advanced Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP). Nuclear propulsion can be affordable and viable compared to other propulsion systems and must overcome a biased public fear due to hyper-environmentalism and a false perception of radiation and explosion risk.
The manner in which technology is being assessed by various groups and individuals is discussed. Attacks on science and technology (specifically military uses and funding), and the disillusionment of the public with the lack of relevance of science to the public interest and with the infallible wisdom of scientists are described. The effects of the fear of environmental pollution are emphasized. It is concluded that the important issues of science, technology, and public policy will require a pluralistic definition of the public interest by open adversary proceedings. It is also felt that the danger is not that new technology will receive inadequate assessment for possible deleterious secondary effects, but that harassment by an overemotional political process may prevent its coming to fruition.
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.
In the realm of online identity, social media has emerged as a rich and dynamic source of user-generated content, making it an invaluable resource for understanding public sentiment on a wide range of topics. Individuals often share their raw emotions and candid opinions on these platforms without fear of judgment or backlash. In this study, we conduct a sentiment analysis on user comments collected from various online platforms, with a specific focus on discussions surrounding autonomous vehicles. Leveraging the capabilities of large language models (LLMs), we classify each comment into one of five sentiment categories: Very Negative, Negative, Neutral, Positive, and Very Positive. Our approach demonstrates the effectiveness of LLMs in capturing nuanced contextual sentiment, offering a scalable and state-of-the-art alternative to traditional manual annotation methods. The results reveal key trends and insights into public perception, enabling a deeper understanding of how autonomous vehicle technologies are received by the online community. Our findings underscore the dynamic nature of public sentiment, which is shaped not only by advances in autonomous vehicle technology but also by contextual events such as regulatory developments, political adjustment and safety incidents.
The early days of rocketry and space exploration in the United States were marked by incredibly rapid progress: a seemingly endless parade of firsts. Not coincidentally, this period also saw more than its fair share of failure, especially in the infamous "kaputnik" days prior to the successful launch of Explorer. Without a standard canon of known quantities to turn to, the early pioneers of rocketry and space flight were forced to dream up new ideas that ranged from the elegant to the bizarre and to accept the fact that the price of radical progress is occasional failure. Nowadays, rapid prototyping and testing have slowed, as we rely more and more on the extensive knowledge pined by our predecessors and on the embarrassment of riches modern engineers get from computational modeling and computer assisted design. In many cases, this leads to much improved or phenomenally more efficient designs. It also, however, fosters a culture so terrified of failure that we over-engineer and overanalyze everything, often tweaking designs for decades before a new system takes flight. (This is not a problem unique to rockets; the same phenomenon seems to have occurred in high-performance jets.) This is one reason why it was possible for President Kennedy to dream of the completion of the Mercury and Gemini missions and a successful landing on the moon in under a decade, while returning to the moon may take nearly twice as long. Lacking access to the tremendous computational resources of the national space program-and, just as importantly, removed from the harsh judgment of public shareholders or congressional appropriations committees-the hungry entrepreneurs who compete for our prizes tend not to display such fear of failure. Instead, most of them follow a rapid "build, test, fly" program. They are willing to throw a handful of concepts against the wall and see what sticks. They often go from drawing on the back of a napkin to firing engines or even flying vehicles in a matter of weeks or months, learning valuable lessons along the way. Indeed, our teams have repeatedly learned many of the most valuable lessons after only a few moments of working with real hardware-lessons that could never have been learned from a CAD drawing, like finding the failure modes of different welding practices or tracking down the interference between an onboard camera and a GPS unit. As Paul Breed, the leader of a Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge team (playfully called Unreasonable Rocket), is fond of saying, "In computer simulations the plumbing never leaks. In real life, it always does."
This viewgraph presentation provides information on the importance of information technology (IT) security (ITS) to NASA's mission. Several points are made concerning the subject. In order for ITS to be successful, it must be supported by management. NASA, while required by law to keep the public informed of its pursuits, must take precautions due to possible IT-based incursions by computer hackers and other malignant persons. Fear is an excellent motivation for establishing and maintaining a robust ITS policy. The ways in which NASA ITS personnel continually increase security are manifold, however a great deal relies upon the active involvement of the entire NASA community.
In 2014, an international group of scholars from various fields analysed the "societal dimensions" of synthetic biology in an interdisciplinary summer school. Here, we report and discuss the biologists' observations on the general perception of synthetic biology by non-biologists who took part in this event. Most attendees mainly associated synthetic biology with contributions from the best-known public figures of the field, rarely mentioning other scientists. Media extrapolations of those contributions appeared to have created unrealistic expectations and irrelevant fears that were widely disconnected from the current research in synthetic biology. Another observation was that when debating developments in synthetic biology, semantics strongly mattered: depending on the terms used to present an application of synthetic biology, attendees reacted in radically different ways. For example, using the term "GMOs" (genetically modified organisms) rather than the term "genetic engineering" led to very different reactions. Stimulating debates also happened with participants having unanticipated points of view, for instance biocentrist ethicists who argued that engineered microbes should not be used for human purposes. Another communication challenge emerged from the connotations and inaccuracies surrounding the word "life", which impaired constructive debates, thus leading to misconceptions about the abilities of scientists to engineer or even create living organisms. Finally, it appeared that synthetic biologists tend to overestimate the knowledge of non-biologists, further affecting communication. The motivation and ability of synthetic biologists to communicate their work outside their research field needs to be fostered, notably towards policymakers who need a more accurate and technical understanding of the field to make informed decisions. Interdisciplinary events gathering scholars working in and around synthetic biology are an effective tool in addressing those issues.
The societal perception of nuclear technology is ambivalent. Many people recognize the great benefits of nuclear technology such as the ability of nuclear power plants to generate massive amounts of electricity with very low carbon emissions as well as the contributions of nuclear medicine as a powerful means of diagnostics and treatment of many illnesses. However, there are profound fears and reservations concerning the use of nuclear power, mostly due to the connection with nuclear weapons, severe nuclear accidents (e.g., Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima), and legacy of nuclear wastes. Addressing the public concerns related to nuclear waste can have a big impact on the public acceptability of nuclear technology.
This article uses ten case studies to illustrate the information needs, various communication approaches, and the communicator's role in explaining environmental health risks from a variety of hazards, to a variety of audiences, over time frames from days to years, using in person consultation, lectures, zooms, and email formats. Events often had a long history before the communication began and may have had a long tail afterward. Audiences may be public officials, companies, workers, communities, or individuals. Each individual may have their own understanding or mental model regarding the hazard, exposure, and risk. The communicator's role or intention may be to reassure an audience that has unrealistic exaggerated concerns or fears or to protect a client if the fears are realistic. Or it may be altruistic to inform a complacent audience to take the risks it faces more seriously. Although risk assessment research has advanced the techniques for communicating abstruse probabilities to audiences with low numeracy, in my experience, audiences are unimpressed by precise–sounding probability numbers, and are more interested in whether exposure is occurring or may occur and how to stop it. Often audiences have reason to be outraged and may be more concerned about punishing wrong doers than about the hazard itself, particularly when the exposure is past and cannot be undone. Thus, there is a difference between discussing the riskiness of a situation (risk communication) and what you are going to do about the situation (risk management). Risk communication is successful when the audience responds as intended, calming down or taking action. These case studies are drawn from a large number of risk communication experiences that I and my Rutgers colleagues have engaged in over the past four decades. Through the 20th century, New Jersey was the most densely industrialized State in United States. New Jersey experienced growth of the chemical and petrochemical industries and the unfortunately profligate disposal of toxic wastes. Having the most Superfund sites of any state is a dubious distinction, but New Jersey also has the most experience in evaluating and responding to these hazards.
United States critical infrastructure entities are increasingly targeted by motivated and capable threat actors and must be prepared to assess and treat a diverse range of cyber risks. Consequently, this necessitates some form of analytical process to evaluate risks and inform cyber security investment decisions. A potential solution for structuring cyber risk evaluation exists within the field of sovereign credit ratings – where agencies employ mature approaches that integrate quantitative and qualitative data to produce a singular value of assessment. Adapting such approaches, we present a novel criterion and methodology for measuring and communicating the likelihood element of cyber risk. The methodology is composed of three sequential phases: a quantitative baseline organized by distinct capability frames, a bounded qualitative adjustment per frame, and a greater-bounded qualitative adjustment spanning the entire process. The process culminates in publication of a cyber capability rating that communicates a critical infrastructure entity’s ability and willingness to mitigate discontinuous function due to cyberattack.
Both the NASA Glenn Research Center and the Allison Advanced Development Company (AADC) have worked to develop and demonstrate erosion-resistant coatings that would increase the life and durability of composite materials used in commercial aircraft engines. These composite materials reduce component weight by 20 to 30 percent and result in less fuel burn and emissions and more fuel savings. Previously, however, their use was limited because of poor erosion resistance, which causes concerns about safety and leads to high maintenance costs. The coatings were tested by the University of Cincinnati, and the composites were manufactured by Texas Composites and coated by Engelhard and NASA Glenn. Rolls-Royce Corporation uses composite materials, which are stronger and less dense than steel or titanium, to make bypass vanes for their AE3007 engines. These engines are widely used in regional jet aircraft (Embraer) and unmanned air vehicles such as the Northrop Grumman Global Hawk. Coatings developed by NASA/Rolls-Royce can reduce erosion from abrasive materials and from impurities in the air that pass over these vanes, allowing Rolls-Royce to take advantage of the benefits of composite materials over titanium without the added costs of increased maintenance and/or engine failure. The Higher Operating Temperature Propulsion Components (HOTPC) Project developed cost-effective, durable coatings as part of NASA's goal to increase aviation system capacity growth. These erosion coatings will reduce the number of special inspections or instances of discontinued service due to erosion, allowing aircraft capacity to be maintained without inconveniencing the traveling public. A specific example of extending component life showed that these coatings increased the life of graphite fiber and polymer composite bypass vanes up to 8 times over that of the uncoated vanes. This increased durability allows components to operate to full design life without the fear of wear or failure. Recently, Rolls-Royce completed over 2000 hr of engine testing with the coated fan exit bypass vanes. There was no loss of coating after nearly 5000 typical engine cycles. Midway through the engine tests, the coated vanes were removed from the engine during a scheduled maintenance and inspection period. The vanes were shipped back to Glenn, where they underwent further stress testing in the Structural Dynamics Lab, mimicking more extreme conditions than those typical of the AE3007 engine cycle. These vanes were then replaced in the AE3007 and subjected to another 1000 hr of engine tests. Once again, there was no loss of coating and only a minimal appearance of cracking.
Abstract Historical assessment of radiation effects at low doses (below 0.2 Sv) are generally the result of back extrapolation from higher doses, which are known to have a linear relation between risk and dose. There are multiple counter-examples, and some literature argues that a threshold, nonlinear, or even a beneficial effect (hormeisis) can occur from radiation below these doses. The common theme found in all of these studies stems from the traditional approach of correlating disease rates to stimulus and then effectively curve-fitting the result toward zero dose. What has not been considered in general are the personal stress levels of the exposed individuals due to fear of cancer from low doses. The increased levels of cortisol due to the psychological stress from fear or depression has been shown in the literature to increase cancer probability. The extent to which low-dose exposed individuals were highly fearful or stressed from the radiation exposure would then give rise to elevated cancer based on stress rather than a fundamental radiogenic mechanism. If the population under epidemiological study is aware of a potential historical exposure (no matter how small) and has then lived under stress from fear or depression due to that exposure, the psychosomatic effects will bias the epidemiology accordingly and so should be quantified and accounted for as done with the effects of smoking. Health Phys. 129(0):000-000; 2025
Nuclear technology's controversial status has been shaped by its early use in military applications, fear driven by high-profile accidents, and unresolved waste management challenges. There have, on the other hand, been periodic claims that a “nuclear renaissance” is imminent, driven by different dynamics at different times, most recently related to growing energy demands and increasing concern over carbon emissions. In this article, we respond to urgent calls for more nuclear engineers, resulting from the latest rallying cry around nuclear energy, by reframing the problem using a systems thinking approach that illuminates new pathways for nuclear workforce development via interdisciplinary pedagogies. By building nuclear education into a wide variety of disciplines, we argue, the nuclear workforce could become more resilient to ebbs and flows in energy markets and public opinion. Widening nuclear education beyond nuclear engineers could also reduce the isolation and compartmentalization that has limited the possibilities of nuclear technology. We show how growing and diversifying the overall nuclear workforce could create a wide variety of career opportunities outside STEM and enable greater specialization within STEM, since nuclear engineers and other specialists could be freed up to focus on technological and infrastructural innovations. We argue that interventions into nuclear education should establish new connections and applications of the nuclear sciences in diverse areas of expertise to develop a broad range of professionals who can contribute to a more stable nuclear workforce, bringing what we call “critical and creative nuclear energy literacies” to long-standing and systemic challenges around nuclear energy.