XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics   
   From: vaughnsimon@gmail.com   
      
   On 10/13/2016 8:11 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:   
   > To get the equivalent of a small 50 MW nuclear reactor on Mars, you   
   > would need over a million square meters of solar panels which only work   
   > during the day.   
      
   We are a long way from being able to put a 50 MW nuke plant on Mars.   
   Making 50 MW of heat isn't the hard part.  The hard part is turning   
   megawatts of heat into megawatts of electricity.  Anything beyond a very   
   few kilowatts requires some sort of heat engine, which means moving   
   parts.  In a compact nuke plant, those moving parts will likely be   
   radioactive, and therefore not repairable.  Would you want your life   
   depending on something like that?   
      
   Note that a Mars plant would need to produce heat to make electricity   
   and also heat for other purposes, such as heating dwellings.   
      
   To give you some idea of the present state of the art, NASA has done   
   development work on a 40 KW unit.  Here is an excellent rundown of the   
   present state-of-the-art in space nukes.   
   http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-nucle   
   r-applications/transport/nuclear-reactors-for-space.aspx   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)