Power generation on Mars

Void · 2018-10-03 19:37:48

Thanks all of you.

I have found out that my copy and paste works from the image, to wordpad. So the image script is in there. However does not work if I do the [ img]???[ /img]. Will work on it some more.

I am able to paste my password if I to log on if I have it on Notepad.

……

Josh, yes there is more to read. It looks like they think they may be able to improve the restored temperature significantly.

And molten salt storage has merit to compare to. However Molten Salt storage would leak heat over time. So this has the advantage of storing energy perhaps as long as 18 years.

The last line of the quote, indicates that they have hopes of increasing the restore temperature by 110 degC. (I think).

So, if stored in a lake bottom @ 2 degC, could it be hoped that a temperature of 65 degC would result now? And is their intention to get to:
65 + 110 degC = 175 degC,
or would they think they could get to 110 degC?
Not so sure.

Even so, I guess another factor would be what is the volume of the material to store the calories? Relative to a molten salt bath.

Another factor is maintenance. Common plastics I think will last a very long time at the bottom of a cold lake, not exposed to UV. As I said before I am unknowing about the chemical reactions inside of the containers. I am hoping chemically stable.

But to store energy during the day and generate power at night is good.
To have resilience in the face of a global dust storm, or some type of system failures would be very good.

Last edited by Void (2018-10-03 19:49:24)

JoshNH4H · 2018-10-03 21:39:44

Void wrote:

I have found out that my copy and paste works from the image, to wordpad. So the image script is in there. However does not work if I do the [ img]???[ /img]. Will work on it some more.
I am able to paste my password if I to log on if I have it on Notepad.

If the image is on your computer you need to upload it to the internet first, then follow the procedure I mentioned. I normally use imgur.com to do that.

SpaceNut · 2018-10-04 20:27:10

The level of heat for salts will normally be with systems that concentrate the heat energy with reflectors that track the sun such as the Heliotowers of New Mexico.

SpaceNut · 2019-01-17 20:34:13

recent power and thermal heat discusions

https://www.humanpowerplant.be/2017/09/ … plant.html

exercise and save the power you create

SpaceNut · 2019-03-16 11:03:32

Thanks for the power information:

kbd512 wrote:

In any event, USGS has a neat little tool you can use to view quite a bit of data about our wind turbines (note: down now due to maintenance, apparently):
Mapping the Nation's Wind Turbines
Since you like wind turbines so much, here's a link to a little Canadian company that may be of interest to you:
WhalePower Corporation
Maybe they can provide sufficient torque at low wind speeds to negate the requirement for a gearbox for onshore wind turbines so we can use Magnax's axial flux generators to decrease the weight at the top of the tower.
Like so:
Magnax axial flux electric generator - wind turbine animation
I believe it incorporates the same type of load control feature as Haliade.

These style of of power creation is independant of the sping cycle as its collection of what is called wild power in which there are converters and inverters used to link what is save in the initial step as a DC voltage on Super caps or batteries and then converted to a steady state voltage. The in coming cycle, voltages are over a wide varied levels so the first stage is a wide inout voltage converter. which charges the next stage to a fixed level for use.

SpaceNut · 2019-03-16 14:07:23

Its a motor no its a generator and depending on what why its wired its can be both.

Shrinking the mass of the motor

MagnaxAF_Promo.jpg?itok=2m5AHvZS

https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/2795152/ … 20v1.9.pdf

SpaceNut · 2019-03-16 14:28:41

http://www.labc.usb.ve/paginas/EC5136/M … 20v1.5.pdf

https://www.emworks.com/ckfinder/userfi … 0Motor.pdf

knightdepaix · 2019-03-17 08:28:29

SpaceNut wrote:

recent power and thermal heat discusions
https://www.humanpowerplant.be/2017/09/ … plant.html
exercise and save the power you create

This makes sense at a gym location near the greenhouses of a human settlement on Mars. The energy saved from power by humans exercising over time and waste heat from electricity and vehicle fuel generation and consumption as infrared radiation is stored and released as ultraviolet radiation by LED.

See another thread for photon upconversion:
http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=8916

SpaceNut · 2019-03-17 08:37:00

Human execise is a part of combating Mars low gravity for man so why not make that apart of our energy sources, sure its less than others but every little bit save mass and gives a reserve for other activity as well as growth. Thanks for reading my posts knightdepaix to which we are also looking at the idea for backup in recumbent/ light mass rovers as well. The image of the motor in posts between this one and the quoted are also possible to be configured as a generator.

tahanson43206 · 2019-03-30 09:41:49

For kbd512 ...

A Facebook post from an acquaintance contained this text:

Just know that the U.S. Senate introduced the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act this week to advance nuclear reactor technologies and I AM SO HERE FOR IT.

I too am in favor of getting off the dime with nuclear fission, so hope that other forum contributors can add to this hint.

(th)

kbd512 · 2019-03-30 14:04:24

tahanson43206,

Well, it's about time. If people are serious about divesting ourselves of the wholesale use of fossil fuels to combat climate change, then we need even more energy dense alternatives to fossil fuels to be implemented on an unprecedented scale.

Plan A - Business as usual, burning ever-increasing quantities of fossil fuels, until we eventually run out, because the environmentalists simply will not admit that solar and wind technologies still don't work well enough at the global scale required. When you're stuck in a hole, the first order of business should be to admit that there's a problem and stop digging.

Plan B - Start a serious effort to build the fuel cell and nuclear reactor infrastructure required to transition to a Hydrogen economy while we work on perfecting and industrializing marvelous new futuristic technologies like quantum computing, CNT's, Graphene, fusion, anti-matter, purely magnetic generators, batteries or super capacitors that match the energy density of chemical fuels, and a new "theory of everything" that closely follows observational evidence.

Plan C - After Plan B is well under way, start looking at ways to use our new technologies to sustain development into perpetuity. Part of that plan means utilizing the much greater resources of our local solar system and moving portions of our population to other planets to assure the survival of our species. Space exploration and colonization will clearly play a major role in that endeavor, but we're at least several decades away from that goal.

Plan D - As our technological capabilities approach some of the more mundane technologies seen in Star Trek and Star Wars, we need to construct true starships that future generations will use to explore our galaxy, and eventually, other galaxies.

We're currently stuck on "Plan A" because too many people are completely fixated on leaping past what we can realistically achieve with technology we have and know how to use. Energy is the key to every endeavor we wish to undertake. We wouldn't have made it as far as we have without massive quantities of it. If we want to go farther and faster, then we need a lot more of it, and in a form that won't eventually kill us all. To me, nuclear power is just a viable means to that end. It's a stepping stone to something better, albeit one that we desperately need.

Control over the atom is equivalent to unlimited power. Unlimited power is always a double-edged sword. There's always a price to be paid for exercising that power. The exceptionally keen edge of that blade is merciless untoward those who do not show adequate respect for what they've been given. Even so, I believe we should take what's being offered, complain less about the power that science has granted to us, and endeavor to be as responsible as we should be with that kind of power. We should also recognize that our little atomic firecrackers are insignificant compared to the power of a star or an asteroid the size of a small city moving through space as fast as we are.

RobertDyck · 2019-03-31 10:57:37

Several nuclear technologies were developed, but nuclear activists convinced Congress not to proceed. One is reprocessing. When nuclear fuel rods get contaminated with too much fission fragments, that's nuclear waste after atoms are split, with too much they "poison" the nuclear reaction so that fuel rod does not produce useful heat. When that happens that rod is removed, treated as waste. But there's still significant quantity of unused fuel, so reprocessing separates unused fuel from waste. The fuel can be formed into fresh fuel rods, the waste is separated for disposal. This is more efficient because you make use of all uranium mined and enriched, instead of throwing a significant portion in a waste dump. And this reduces quantity of nuclear waste.

Another technology uses trans-uranics as fuel. Some of the moderated neutrons don't split uranium atoms, instead are absorbed by uranium causing it to be transmuted into something else. This converts uranium into various elements close to uranium on the periodic table. Most people are familiar with the breeder cycle: convert U-238 to Pu-239. Plutonium-239 is easier to split than Uranium-235 and releases more energy. U-238 does not split, but when it absorbs a neutron it becomes U-239. That decays (short half-life but my web periodic table no longer says how long) releasing a gamma photon and a beta particle (high energy electron) to become Neptunium-239. That beta decays with a half-life of 2.355 days to Plutonium-239. In nature 99.2745% of uranium by weight is U-238, only 0.7200% is U-235 and 0.0055% is U-234. U-234 will not split either, but when it absorbs a neutron it becomes U-235. Fuel for reactors in the US is enriched to 2% U-235, but that means 98% is still U-238. So one obvious design feature is to ensure plutonium can be used as fuel. But U-235 doesn't always split, sometimes it becomes U-236. That beta decays with a half-life of 23.4 million years to Thorium-232. That's the natural isotope of thorium, but millions of years? U-236 can absorb a neutron to become U-237, which beta decays is 6.75 days to Neptunium-237, which alpha decays in 2.14 million years to Protactinium-233. Again, millions of years. Neptunium-237 can absorb a neutron to become Neptunium-238, which beta decays in 2.117 days to Plutonium-238. Etc. I think you get the idea. The process produces a lot of elements close to Uranium. A fast neutron reactor can use all of them as fuel. Treating trans-uranics as fuel eliminates more waste.

elderflower · 2019-03-31 15:58:47

Also you can run a suitable reactor on Thorium with a little bit of more active elements for initiators. There is an awful lot more Thorium than uranium.

kbd512 · 2019-03-31 17:57:02

We have so much U238 sitting around and collecting dust in Paducah, that we may as well burn some of that in a traveling wave reactor. The Thorium is good stuff, too, and we also have container ship loads of that stuff buried out west, should we ever decide to dig it up and burn it.

If we don't do that, then eventually those scary terrorists will get the bright idea that they can steal some of it. I feel a lot better about all of our nuclear materials sitting inside nuclear reactors and generating electricity for us than in storage containers in the middle of BFE.

SpaceNut · 2019-03-31 19:32:55

I guess the question for mars is will we need the concrete design to contain the nuclear reactor as we see in earth builds?

SpaceNut · 2019-09-24 21:34:14

A review on solar-hydrogen/fuel cell hybrid energy systems for stationary applications
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a … 8508000439

Minimum and maximum overall energy and exergy efficiencies of the system are calculated based on these paths. It is found that the overall energy efficiency values of the system vary between 0.88% and 9.7%, while minimum and maximum overall exergy efficiency values of the system are between 0.77% and 9.3% as a result of selecting various energy paths

Solar to a storable is at a loss thats not going to make up for the diffence to create.

SpaceNut · 2019-09-25 18:42:45

Here is a Record solar hydrogen production with concentrated sunlight
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 … 111853.htm

Demonstration project of the solar hydrogen energy system located on Taleghan-Iran: Technical-economic assessments
http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp/057/vol4/004/ecp57vol4_004.pdf

SpaceNut · 2019-11-26 16:41:27

Giving topic a bump as we are talking about energy and storage of heat sources.

Even when we consider the low temperature heat for storage and for power creation we can up the temperature via solar concentration.
The working fluid for mars will need to be tolerant of the mars daily temperature cycle.
MIT Team Turns Auto Parts Into Green Power for Remote Regions

So for mars solar concentration is just a shade over a 2 times multiplier but go to 3 for safety for the same generator system. Something that we also know is it can be made from mylar anodized films.

Heat Engine Projects.
http://www.redrok.com/engine.htm

SpaceNut · 2020-08-06 15:12:12

After being through a couple of days without a real backup system for delivery its time to come up with grid failure options for how we might survive on mars where ever we might be for when it happens and the lights go out hard.
What shoul those local or remote options be.

Calliban · 2020-08-06 15:36:41

SpaceNut wrote:

After being through a couple of days without a real backup system for delivery its time to come up with grid failure options for how we might survive on mars where ever we might be for when it happens and the lights go out hard.
What shoul those local or remote options be.

If we are talking emergency power supplies that get used once in a blue moon, then I would suggest methanol-oxygen, burned in some sort of diesel engine. Any waste heat provides hot water and keeps you warm.

If we need emergency oxygen supplies, then Mars has the natural ingredients for perchlorate candles.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemica … _generator

In fact, if we do find organics on Mars, these could be reacted with perchlorate to generate heat and power in emergency power-packs.

We can store food almost indefinitely in Mars ambient conditions. It would never go bad. Water, much the same. We could store it as buried ice blocks or in tanks. And of course surface greenhouses will generate some oxygen.

One interesting feature on Mars is that regolith under Mars near vacuum conditions, has about the same insulation properties as rockwool on Earth. So huge quantities of LOX could be stored in thin stainless or aluminium lined underground tanks.

The best way to avoid power outage of course is to have a reliable power source. A nuclear reactor of some kind works just as well in a dust storm.

Last edited by Calliban (2020-08-06 15:39:18)

SpaceNut · 2020-08-06 19:41:18

Interesting engine concept using " methanol-oxygen" and burried tanks make sense one we can make them.
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/properties

I need to read up on diesel engine.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/diesel-fuel/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_fuel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_engine

https://oxeonenergy.com/projects/produc … urces-mars

Now I remember the Russian oxygen candles but "ingredients for perchlorate candles" does seem possible for a made on mars insitu.

So the are options for a stationary situation but what about mobile emergencies....

SpaceNut · 2020-08-09 15:07:08

kbd512 wrote:

GW,
I've taken a second look at using Strontium-90 for in-space and surface power applications, mostly using direct thermal power supplied to advanced supercritical CO2 turbines. Sr90 may be less desirable compared to Pu238, but it's very plentiful compared to Pu238 and much cheaper. We also have many thousands of tons of the stuff since it's a daughter product of fission. We'd need 5,435kg of Sr90 to produce 2.5MWt at BOL and 1.5MWt after 20 years of service. I estimate the radiator mass at 500kg or less, though even if that was doubled it wouldn't be a major problem. I was also thinking that at least part of the radiator mass could be supported by the sides of the gondola to keep the CG as low as possible. The SNAP-50 reactor design of the 1960's was to dissipate a 1,448kWt thermal load at 1156F using 1,100 pounds of 316 SS tubing and Copper fin radiator and that radiator design was 700ft^2 (from the boiling Potassium reactor design Calliban pointed out). I believe that was single-sided, as it would be in this application, although I could be wrong about that.
Some of the radiator mass would be integrated with the vehicle mass.
Sr90 Characteristics:
Density: 2.375g/cm^3 near the melting point
Half Life: 28.1 years
BOL Thermal Power Output: 460W/kg
BOL Surface Temperature: 700C to 800C
Pu238 Characteristics:
Density: 19.329g/cm^3
Half Life: 87 years
BOL Thermal Power Output: 540W/kg
BOL Surface Temperature: 1050C
Anyway, the idea is that the RTG and radiator mass is split between two tracked prime movers, so each tracked prime mover nominally produces 1MWe at BOL or 750kWe at EOL, one at the front and one at the end of an overland version of a railway boxcar. The primary construction material for the prime movers would be the 5083 Aluminum alloy used by the M113 APC, along with forged steel track links and Thoraeus metallic rubber clad road wheels to better withstand low temperatures. The vehicle design will be similar to the Swedish Stridsvagn Strv-103, meaning it will use hydraulic suspension to increase ground clearance for travel and to "kneel" when not in operation to better facilitate loading / unloading operations. If you google, "E-10 Jagdpanzer", visualize this vehicle without a gun and a giant articulating hitch on top to support one end of an Aluminum railway gondola car and that's pretty much what I had in mind. I figure we'll use the T157 track shoe for ease of disassembly with a speed wrench, despite it's weight per foot (71.4 pounds per foot). It's reasonably stout, 21 inches wide, and used on the M2 Bradley IFV- a vehicle in the same tonnage range as the load we're trying to support on Mars.
We're going to stipulate that each prime mover weighs 12t, even with the mass of the RTG and gas turbine, since each prime mover will be a single seat vehicle with limited interior volume. The SCO2 turbine will provide direct mechanical power to an automatic transmission. For reliability, a miniature thermoelectric RTG will supply electrical power to onboard vehicle electronics and life support equipment. A hydraulic pump will be attached to the gas turbine's accessory case to supply hydraulic power for the articulating suspension and for mounting / dismounting the Aluminum gondola at the mine and ore refining facility.
A BNSF aluminum rotary gondola railcar weighs 41,900 lbs / 19,045kg empty and its load limit on a railway is 244,100 lbs / 110,955kg. This type of railcar is used for transport of metal ores. We're going to stipulate that the weight of the steel trucks required for railway use will be replaced with structural reinforcement of the car for overland operations and a pair of articulating "trailer hitch" type structures to connect the gondola to the pair of prime movers. The total mass is 154,000kg on Earth and 58,520kg on Mars.
The complete vehicle with max payload weighs 128,978lbs on Mars, for 20.8hp/ton, when loaded like a train railcar. That's slightly better than the British Challenger 2 MBT, supplied with 19.2hp/ton via its 1,200hp Perkins diesel. Maximum off-road speed for Challenger 2 is 40km/h, so I expect that over a graded trail, this vehicle could manage the same speed.
That's a heck of a lot more mass and power to move this vehicle acceptably well over an off-road environment than a standard railcar requires by rail, but it should still work. Since there probably won't be any paved roads or trains on Mars for quite some time, this solution still permits transport of 110t railcar load using roughly the same transport technology we use here on Earth in mining operations.

Is this a realistic insitu reactor for Mars?

SpaceNut · 2020-11-22 19:21:14

Short of power from solar and nuclear sources we need to make as much as we can insitu..
MegaPower: Generating Electricity for Our Future on the Red Planet

SpaceNut · 2020-12-15 12:17:19

To make the dream on mars possible we will need Water ice on the poles of mars a reality we will need a small reactor.. Thats not a system in the plus 10 meg watt size its smaller.
Tiny Nuclear Reactors Yield a Huge Amount of Clean Hydrogen BB1bV00d.img?h=400&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

NuScale has released new data on its small modular reactor's ability to split hydrogen from water.
High-temperature electrolysis of hydrogen requires process heat.
NuScale's reactor was competitive with solar electrolysis at the right scale.
After getting bodied in the news cycle for a few months, small modular nuclear startup NuScale Power has an additional potential path to the diverse energy market. In a new evaluation run by the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory, NuScale’s nuclear module performed effective catalysis for hydrogen.
The updated analysis found that with the 25 percent increase in power output of a [NuScale Power Module™ (NPM)], one 250 MWt NuScale module is capable of producing 2,053 kg/hour of hydrogen, or nearly 50 metric tons per day, an increase from 1,667 kg/hour of hydrogen or 40 metric tons per day for a 200 MWt NuScale module.
NuScale says these numbers mean that correctly deployed nuclear modules could compete with existing solutions like solar hydrogen plants, helping to eliminate the need for fossil fuel hydrogen.

BB1bVtzO.img?h=714&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

Calliban · 2020-12-16 12:35:59

Megapower: mining and lowering rocks from high mountains to convert gravitational potential energy into mechanical power. This was actually used at a slate mine close to where I live in the North of England. The railway that transported the mined materials to ships on the coast, were powered by gravity. Additionally, the descending fully loaded carts, pulled the empty carts back up the mountain. So no external power supply was needed for transportation of the mined materials. This reduced energy consumption of the transportation and reduced the capital cost of the railway.

I have never heard of this being used to deliberately produce excess energy. A tonne of material dropped from a height of 2km on Mars, would release some 7.5MJ of energy. That isn't much energy - about the same as released from burning half a litre of diesel in an engine. To harness it, you must run a mining operation and have a circular railway running up and down a mountain. Lots of embodied energy and a lot of capital equipment. It would appear to make sense however to use gravity power in planned mining operations - using the gravitational potential energy of the ores to both power their extraction and deliver the materials to their processing facilities. This would only be practical if there is a difference in height between the two.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#126 2018-10-03 19:37:48

Re: Power generation on Mars

#127 2018-10-03 21:39:44

Re: Power generation on Mars

#128 2018-10-04 20:27:10

Re: Power generation on Mars

#129 2019-01-17 20:34:13

Re: Power generation on Mars

#130 2019-03-16 11:03:32

Re: Power generation on Mars

#131 2019-03-16 14:07:23

Re: Power generation on Mars

#132 2019-03-16 14:28:41

Re: Power generation on Mars

#133 2019-03-17 08:28:29

Re: Power generation on Mars

#134 2019-03-17 08:37:00

Re: Power generation on Mars

#135 2019-03-30 09:41:49

Re: Power generation on Mars

#136 2019-03-30 14:04:24

Re: Power generation on Mars

#137 2019-03-31 10:57:37

Re: Power generation on Mars

#138 2019-03-31 15:58:47

Re: Power generation on Mars

#139 2019-03-31 17:57:02

Re: Power generation on Mars

#140 2019-03-31 19:32:55

Re: Power generation on Mars

#141 2019-09-24 21:34:14

Re: Power generation on Mars

#142 2019-09-25 18:42:45

Re: Power generation on Mars

#143 2019-11-26 16:41:27

Re: Power generation on Mars

#144 2020-08-06 15:12:12

Re: Power generation on Mars

#145 2020-08-06 15:36:41

Re: Power generation on Mars

#146 2020-08-06 19:41:18

Re: Power generation on Mars

#147 2020-08-09 15:07:08

Re: Power generation on Mars

#148 2020-11-22 19:21:14

Re: Power generation on Mars

#149 2020-12-15 12:17:19

Re: Power generation on Mars

#150 2020-12-16 12:35:59

Re: Power generation on Mars

Board footer