Abstract
A major constraint upon space technology to date has been the low level of spacecraft power-supplies, either for propulsion or for electrically-powered on-board systems of all kinds. The first side of this constraint has been reflected in the practice of sending relatively small spacecraft on protracted missions within the solar system, using the available gravitational forces as their main means of progress. The second side of it has been less obvious, but is contained in the general assumption that the primary functions even of manned spacecraft are to interact with and to communicate information, relating either to our own planet or to the universe around it. Such functions require the application of much less energy than processes designed to make major physical changes either in open space, or on a celestial body, or to aspects of the Earth from space. Examples of these three types of undertaking would be construction and maintenance of large orbiting space stations; mining an asteroid; and building a satellite to supply Earth with solar power in the form of a directed-energy beam.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
In April 1958, for example, Dr Theodore Merkle, head of the research division at the AEC’s Livermore Radiation Laboratory, stated with regard to the testing and use of the thermodynamic nuclear rockets (see section ‘Thermodynamic nuclear rockets’) that ‘As far as increasing the total burden of radioactivity in the earth’s atmosphere is concerned I don’t see any danger at all’ — US Congress, House of Representatives, Select Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration, Hearings on Astronautics and Space Exploration ( Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1958 ), p. 92.
This event roughly trebled the amount of global pollution by the uncommon plutonium 238 isotope (218Pu), a radioactive, alpha-emitting and carcinogenic substance, with a half-life of about 87 years — Edward Hardy, Philip Krey, and Herbert Volchok, ‘Global Inventory and Distribution of Fallout Plutonium’, Nature, Vol. 241, no. 5390 (16 February 1973), pp. 444–5.
It should be noted that most plutonium in the environment consists of the 239Pu and 240Pu isotopes, distributed as a result of the physical inefficiency of atmospheric nuclear explosions between 1945 and 1963. A recent, highly misleading claim that the 1964 Transit launch failure by itself dumped ‘more plutonium into the atmosphere than open-air bomb tests’ appears to have resulted from failure to appreciate this simple point — Eliot Marshall, ‘Shooting Plutonium Into Space’, Science, Vol. 231 (21 March 1986), pp. 1358–9.
The author has not been able to consult Joseph Angelo, Jr and David Buden, Space Nuclear Power (Melbourne, Fla.: Krieger, 1985), which may have done much to remedy this deficiency.
Kiwi-B ground-testing reactors, so called after the flightless bird, had an operating power of 1000–1500 megawatts (thermal) and a theoretical thrust capacity of 50 000 lb. Four years later, the respective figures for the Phoebus-2 were 5000 megawatts (thermal) and 250 000 lb. See Samuel Glasstone, Sourcebook on Atomic Energy (Third edition) ( Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1967 );
Glenn Seaborg, Nuclear Energy in Space Exploration (Washington: US Atomic Energy Commission, n.d. — c.1968?); and James Powell, ‘Space Reactor Technology and Related Issues’ (Paper for Pasha Publications conference on Technology, Innovation and Military Space, Arlington, 10–11 October 1984).
Missiles and Rockets, Vol. 2, no. 2 (February 1957), p. 38. One early US study of Soviet technical literature concluded that a possible Soviet design might be for a graphite-moderated uranium oxide reactor with a low average core temperature of 1728°C, and liquid hydrogen as the working fluid, giving an ISP of only 532 sec in a vacuum — Donald Ritchie, ‘Soviet Rocket Propulsion’ (Paper for the Fifth Symposium on Ballistic Missile and Space Technology, University of Southern California, 29–31 August 1960). This is summarised in US Congress, Senate, Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences, Soviet Space Programs, Staff Report, 31 May 1962, pp. 112–22 (Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1962).
Karl Gilz’in, Sputniks and After (London: Macdonald, 1959), pp. 78, 79.
Philip Bono and Kenneth Gatland, Frontiers of Space ( London: Blandford Press, 1969 ), p. 236.
Colonel Oleg Penkovsky’s posthumous memoirs contain a story that a Soviet nuclear rocket exploded accidentally on the launch pad in November 1960, killing Marshal M. Nedelin and many other people — Oleg Penkovsky (ed.), F. Gibney, The Penkovsky Papers (New York: Doubleday, 1965), p. 239. But Colonel Penkovsky was not a sufficiently reliable source, on matters beyond his immediate knowledge, to establish such a claim as fact, and the writings published in his name are widely held to have been doctored by his CIA sponsors for political purposes.
Statement by Captain Robert Truax (US Navy), Member, Military Assistance Group, Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Defense, in US Congress, House of Representatives, Select Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration, The Next Ten Years in Space, 1959–1969, Staff Report for the House Committee on Science and Astronautics, 2 January 1959 ( Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1959 ), pp. 204–11.
General accounts of Project Orion can be found in John McPhee, The Curve of Binding Energy (New York: Ballantine Books,’ 1975), pp. 121–34
Nigel Calder, Spaceships of the Mind ( London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1978 ), pp. 98–101.
The standard reference on the history of nuclear pulse propulsion systems is Anthony Martin and Alan Bond, ‘Nuclear Pulse Propulsion’, J. British Interplanetary Society, vol. 32, no. 8 (August 1979), pp. 283–310.
Statement by John McCone, Chairman, US Atomic Energy Commission, in The Next Ten Years in Space, 1959–1969 (see note 9), pp. 106–7. A similar opinion was voiced in the Soviet Union by R. G. Perelman — Alfred Parry, Russian Rockets and Missiles ( London: Macmillan, 1960 ), p. 331.
For SNAP 8, see Willard Libby, ‘Atomic Energy and Space’, in S. Ramo (ed.), Peacetime Uses of Outer Space ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961 ), pp. 192–3.
Kenneth Gatland, Astronautics in the Sixties ( London: Iliffe Books Ltd, 1962 ), p. 31.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences, Soviet Space Programs, 1962–1965, Staff Report, 30 December 1966 ( Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1966 ), p. 259.
Peter Smolders, Soviets in Space ( Guildford: Lutterworth Press, 1973 ), p. 88.
Anthony Martin (ed.), Project Daedalus, J. British Interplanetary Society, Supplement to Vol. 31, 1978. NB: unless explicitly qualified as thermal quantities, wattages throughout are for electrical power levels.
Rip Bulkeley and Graham Spinardi, Space Weapons — Deterrence or Delusion? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1986), pp. 96–8, 290–91.
Actual power consumption on past US spacecraft has only once been higher than a maximum of 1 kW to 2 kW. The exception was Skylab, which needed 15 kW — Charles Badcock (ed.), ‘High power for space systems’, Aerospace America, Vol. 22, pt 6 (June 1984 ), pp. 68–72.
A Soviet list omits 244Cm and includes cobalt-60 (60Co) — English abstract of G. M. Fradkin et al., ‘Soviet advances in isotopic power generation’, in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy (New York: United Nations and International Atomic Energy Authority, 1971), vol. 7, p. 335.
A detailed description of Snap 3 is given in Libby, ‘Atomic Energy and Space’, 1961, pp. 175–97. Sources on US RTGs are seldom mutually consistent. Amongst those upon which this account is based are Glas-stone, Sourcebook on Atomic Energy, 1967; William Wirin, ‘The Sky is Falling — Managing Space Objects’, in Proceedings of the 27th Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, 1984 ( New York: International Institute of Space Law of the International Astronautical Federation, 1985 ), pp. 146–54;
Bhupendra Jasani, ‘The military use of outer space’, in World Armaments and Disarmament: SIPRI Yearbook 1979 (London: Taylor & Francis Ltd, 1979), Ch. 4, pt III, pp. 267–78, and Table 4.26, pp. 301–2. (Unfortunately, Jasani is not always careful to distinguish satellites from space probes.)
Reginald Turnill (ed.), Jane’s Spaceflight Directory (London: Jane’s Publishing, 1984), p. 141; and Wirin, ‘The Sky is Falling…’, 1984.
Richard Laeser, William McLaughlin, and Donna Wolff, ‘Engineering Voyager 2’s Encounter with Uranus’, Scientific American, Vol. 255, no. 5 (November 1986), pp. 34–43.
Milton Klein, ‘Nuclear Systems for Space Power and Propulsion’, in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy (New York: United Nations and International Atomic Energy Authority, 1971), Vol. 7, p. 256; also Jasani, ‘The military use…’, 1979.
Steven Aftergood, ‘Nuclear space mishaps and Star Wars’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 42, no. 8 (October 1986), pp. 40–43.
Andrei Petrosy’ants, trans. W. E. Jones, Problems of Nuclear Science and Technology (fourth edition) (London: Pergamon, 1981). G. M. Fradkin et al., ‘Soviet advances…’, 1971, state that all eight radioisotopes on their list have been used for Soviet RTGs, but it is unlikely that all have been used for NPSOs.
Bhupendra Jasani, ‘Nuclear power sources on satellites in outer space’, in World Armaments and Disarmament: SIPRI Yearbook 1983 (London: Taylor & Francis Ltd, 1983), Appendix 15A, pp. 457–63.
Ibid., pp. 193–5; also Gary Bennett and David Buden, ‘Use of Nuclear Reactors in Space’, The Nuclear Engineer, Vol. 24, pt 4, July/August 1983, p. 110.
Strategic Defense Initiative Organization, Report to the Congress on the Strategic Defense Initiative ( Washington: SDIO, 1985 ), pp. 70–73.
Robert Wiley, ‘Space Power Program and DARPA’s Role’ (Paper to Pasha Publications conference on Technology, Innovation and Military Space, Arlington, 10–11 October 1984); Eliot Marshall, ‘DoE’s Way-Out Reactors’, Science, Vol. 231, 21 March 1986, pp. 1357–9.
James Powell, ‘Space Reactor Technology and Related Issues’ (Paper to Pasha Publications conference on Technology, Innovation and Military Space, Arlington, 10–11 October 1984); SDIO, Report to the Congress, 1985; Richard Verga and Robert Wiley, int. John Newbauer, ‘Multimegawatt Nuclear Reactors in Orbit’, Aerospace America, Vol. 24, pt 4 (April 1986), pp. 45–6; and Aftergood, ‘Nuclear space mishaps’, 1986.
With the important exception of nuclear rockets and other propulsion systems, US and Soviet scientists have exchanged information about each other’s space NPS fairly openly, at the UN/IAEA conferences on peaceful uses of atomic energy and elsewhere, since the late 1950s. In giving figures for various dimensions of Soviet reactors I have preferred any that are supplied by Petrosy’ants, Problems of Nuclear Science, 1981. Where Petrosy’ants is silent, I have generally followed R. Townsend Reese and Charles Vick, ‘Soviet Nuclear Powered Satellites’, J. British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 36, no. 10 (October 1983), pp. 457–62. ( Unfortunately, Reese and Vick do not cite Petrosy’ants among their sources. )
Some details are from the English abstract of G. M. Gryaznov et al., ‘Construction of the “Topaz” Thermionic Reactor-Converter and its Power Trials’, in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy (New York: United Nations and International Atomic Energy Authority, 1971), Vol. 7, p. 349, and the related discussion, ibid., pp. 374–5. There is also a useful diagram of the Topaz in Aviation Week & Space Technology, Vol. 125, no. 12 (22 September 1986), p. 19. Colin Morrison has given a comprehensive first-hand account of Operation Morning Light, the Canadian search-and-recovery operation to clear up the debris from Cosmos 954, in Voyage into the Unknown (Ontario: Canada’s Wings Inc., 1983). Two points in his book conflict with the picture of the Topaz reactor given by the above sources. The first is his report, on p. 66, of a conjecture by experts involved at the time that the coolant might have been 50–60 kg of lithium hydride, rather than a mixture of sodium and potassium. The second concerns the ratio of molybdenum to uranium in the EGKs. On p. 85, Morrison records that there was 8–10 per cent of molybdenum mixed with the uranium in the particulate debris. At the 1971 UN/IAEA Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, however, Vyacheslav Kuznetsov stated that there was approximately the same amount of molybdenum as of uranium dioxide, by volume, in the Topaz fuel elements. However, since Kuznetsov also describes them as a mixture of fuel materials, rather than as the concentric tubes of the EGK as it was later constructed, he may have been describing an earlier type of EGK than that used in the Cosmos 954 reactor.
This reasoning appears to be confirmed by Paul Stares, Space Weapons and U.S. Strategy (London: Croom Helm, 1985), p. 142
David Baker, The Shape of Wars To Come ( Cambridge: Patrick Stephens Ltd, 1981 ), p. 82.
Kenneth Gatland, Robot Explorers (London: Blandford Press, 1972), p. 144; Turnill, Jane’s Spaceflight Directory, 1984, p. 150.
Morrison, Voyage, 1983, pp. 133–4. The Soviet Note of 31 May 1978 stated that ‘the radiation situation over the entire examined territory judging by the level of external radiation could be recognized as practically safe for population. In similar conditions further search on the Soviet Union’s territory would evidently be discontinued.’ — in Wirin, ‘The Sky is Falling…’, 1984, p. 147. The text of the Damage Liability Convention appears as Appendix 3 in Carl Christol, The Modern International Law of Outer Space (New York: Pergamon Press, 1982).
Wirin, ‘The Sky is Falling’, 1984. This version is also accepted, at least for the reactor core, by Christopher Lee in War in Space ( London: Hamish Hamilton, 1986 ), p. 84.
Eilene Galloway, ‘United Nations Consideration of Nuclear Power for Satellites’, Proceedings of the 22nd Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, 1979 ( New York: International Institute of Space Law of the International Astronautical Federation, 1980 ), pp. 131–9.
Cesáreo Espada, ‘The Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space’, Proceedings of the 27th Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, 1984 ( New York: International Institute of Space Law of the International Astronautical Federation, 1985 ), pp. 131–9.
Aldo Cocca, ‘If Possible, Nuclear Power Energy Sources Should not be Used in Outer Space’, Proceedings of the 27th Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, 1984 ( New York: International Institute of Space Law of the International Astronautical Federation, 1985 ), pp. 202–4.
Jonathan Tucker, ‘U.S. Revives Space Nuclear Power’, High Technology, Vol. 4, pt. 8 (August 1984), pp. 15, 18–19.
Aldo Cocca, ‘From Full Compensation to Total Responsibility’, Proceedings of the 26th Colloquium on the Law of Outer. Space, 1983 (New York: International Institute of Space Law of the International Astronautical Federation, 1984), pp. 157–9; also same author, ‘If possible…’, 1985.
M. Mucsi, ‘Nuclear Batteries on Satellites and Protection of Environment’, Proceedings of the 25th Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, 1982 (New York: International Institute of Space Law of the International Astronautical Federation, 1983), pp. 23–4. The Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts is given as Appendix 2 in Christol, The Modern International Law, 1982.
For revision: Edward Finch, ‘The Registration Treaty and Nuclear Power Systems’, Proceedings of the 28th Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, 1985 (New York: International Institute of Space Law of the International Astronautical Federation, 1986 ), pp. 173–7. Against revision: William Wirin, ‘The Registration Convention’, ibid. pp. 203–7;
Andrei Terekhov, ‘Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space — Problem of Notification’, Proceedings of the 27th Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, 1984 ( New York: International Institute of Space Law of the International Astronautical Federation, 1985 ), pp. 218–24.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1989 Hans Günter Brauch
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bulkeley, R. (1989). Nuclear Power in Space: A Technology Beyond Control?. In: Brauch, H.G. (eds) Military Technology, Armaments Dynamics and Disarmament. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-10221-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-10221-1_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-10223-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-10221-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)