What about a nuclear-powered automobile?

Question

What about a nuclear-powered automobile?

Answer 1

I did the calculations to determine the feasability of an RTG powered vehicle.

It's very feasible. You'd want to get an electric car with a certain range and throw the RTG in the trunk. The idea would be, it would constantly charge your batteries. If you got rid of the RTDs and used something with greater efficiency, you'd basically be looking at a few kilowatts of charging power. You'd be able to drive for hours every day for the rest of your life, without paying a dollar for gasoline.

Cost is another, unrelated question.

Shielding is already good enough that RTGs can withstand reentry into the atmosphere. Some moron in an SUV should be nothing.

Answer 2

There are experiments on atomic planes that uses hafnium-178 as a fuel source.  And hafnium-178 is not weapon grade, so even if terrorists got their hands on it, it doesn't go boom.

Answer 3

Great idea!!  Batman and Robin had one in the 60s!  They were way ahead of their time.  The Batmobile has even better visibility than the Toyota Prius and it comes with a red whoopee light!!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/buglugs/193...

Answer 4

Impossible unless they can make reactors MUCH smaller. And of course a security threat. Terrorists could just buy some cars, take the nuclear fuel out and make a bomb, right?

Oh, and cost. Nuclear fuel is REALLY expensive.

Oh, and safety. Is the average driver qualified to care for radioactive material? Probably not.

Answer 5

They actually have been putting plutonium based generators in spacecraft for years, they work because of the steady radioactive decay puts out heat energy, but since there is no way to throttle that decay  some unusual steps would have to be taken in a car thats normally parked for hours at a time.  In other words it would be like having a 75 horsepower engine running full blast 24 x 7, so there would have to be a means of expelling tremendous amounts of waste heat when the car is parked.  On spacecraft that isn't necessary since the power needs are rather steady state.

Answer 6

Heavy shielding -- chance of release of radioactive materials in a crash-- and the BIG BIG expense of putting in the reactor!------

A better solution available quickly would be the small diesel engines -- available in Europe-- that get 48-55 mpg--

Just remember NOT to spend more on the car than the potential savings in fuel mileage returns.

Answer 7

should be possible if you have an electric car to charge it with a second hand soviet RTG (see wikipedia link) although you may have difficulty getting through customs. i guess you don't mind going sterile and getting leukemia?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sovie...

Answer 8

Nuclear fission?  Those reactors are nothing more than a near-infinite heat source to power a steam generator.  A seemingly over complex system for a car.

Answer 9

The word "nuclear" disqualifies the automobile as being safe.  There are radioactive isotopes there and a lot of potential of harm to humans.  We live about 20 miles from a nuclear reactor, and we have special instructions in case even a hairline crack is apparent.  It is too risky, and those of us who love ourselves, our loved ones ,and the planet would like to see another alternative-- Do you have one?  Toni D. ( a senior lady)

Answer 10

Do we not have any common sense left? Lets think rationally please. Not every future idea conjured up in the fifties is necessarily a good one, or is bound to come true.

Answer 11

The shielding would weigh more than a 18 wheeler could carry.

Answer 12

Great...so we can have how many potentially chernobyles/three mile islands will we have on the road? I'm in a state known for its bad drivers.. I CRINGE at the thought....what about the nuclear waste?