Connect with us

The Conversation

Nuclear rockets could travel to Mars in half the time − but designing the reactors that would power them isn’t easy

Published

on

theconversation.com – Dan Kotlyar, Associate Professor of Nuclear and Radiological Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology – 2024-10-04 07:23:18

Nuclear-powered rockets could one day enable faster space travel.
NASA

Dan Kotlyar, Georgia Institute of Technology

NASA plans to send crewed missions to Mars over the next decade – but the 140 million-mile (225 million-kilometer) journey to the red planet could take several months to years round trip.

This relatively long transit time is a result of the use of traditional chemical rocket fuel. An alternative technology to the chemically propelled rockets the agency develops now is called nuclear thermal propulsion, which uses nuclear fission and could one day power a rocket that makes the trip in just half the time.

Nuclear fission involves harvesting the incredible amount of energy released when an atom is split by a neutron. This reaction is known as a fission reaction. Fission technology is well established in power generation and nuclear-powered submarines, and its application to drive or power a rocket could one day give NASA a faster, more powerful alternative to chemically driven rockets.

NASA and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency are jointly developing NTP technology. They plan to deploy and demonstrate the capabilities of a prototype system in space in 2027 – potentially making it one of the first of its kind to be built and operated by the U.S.

Nuclear thermal propulsion could also one day power maneuverable space platforms that would protect American satellites in and beyond Earth’s orbit. But the technology is still in development.

I am an associate professor of nuclear engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology whose research group builds models and simulations to improve and optimize designs for nuclear thermal propulsion systems. My hope and passion is to assist in designing the nuclear thermal propulsion engine that will take a crewed mission to Mars.

Nuclear versus chemical propulsion

Conventional chemical propulsion systems use a chemical reaction involving a light propellant, such as hydrogen, and an oxidizer. When mixed together, these two ignite, which results in propellant exiting the nozzle very quickly to propel the rocket.

A diagram showing a nuclear thermal propulsion system, with a chamber for hydrogen connected to several pumps, a reactor chamber and a nozzle that the propellant is ejected from.
Scientists and engineers are working on nuclear thermal propulsion systems that would take hydrogen propellant, pump it into a nuclear reactor to generate energy and expel propellant out the nozzle to lift the rocket.
NASA Glenn Research Center

These systems do not require any sort of ignition system, so they’re reliable. But these rockets must carry oxygen with them into space, which can weigh them down. Unlike chemical propulsion systems, nuclear thermal propulsion systems rely on nuclear fission reactions to heat the propellant that is then expelled from the nozzle to create the driving force or thrust.

In many fission reactions, researchers send a neutron toward a lighter isotope of uranium, uranium-235. The uranium absorbs the neutron, creating uranium-236. The uranium-236 then splits into two fragments – the fission products – and the reaction emits some assorted particles.

Fission reactions create lots of heat energy.

More than 400 nuclear power reactors in operation around the world currently use nuclear fission technology. The majority of these nuclear power reactors in operation are light water reactors. These fission reactors use water to slow down the neutrons and to absorb and transfer heat. The water can create steam directly in the core or in a steam generator, which drives a turbine to produce electricity.

Nuclear thermal propulsion systems operate in a similar way, but they use a different nuclear fuel that has more uranium-235. They also operate at a much higher temperature, which makes them extremely powerful and compact. Nuclear thermal propulsion systems have about 10 times more power density than a traditional light water reactor.

Nuclear propulsion could have a leg up on chemical propulsion for a few reasons.

Nuclear propulsion would expel propellant from the engine’s nozzle very quickly, generating high thrust. This high thrust allows the rocket to accelerate faster.

These systems also have a high specific impulse. Specific impulse measures how efficiently the propellant is used to generate thrust. Nuclear thermal propulsion systems have roughly twice the specific impulse of chemical rockets, which means they could cut the travel time by a factor of 2.

Nuclear thermal propulsion history

For decades, the U.S. government has funded the development of nuclear thermal propulsion technology. Between 1955 and 1973, programs at NASA, General Electric and Argonne National Laboratories produced and ground-tested 20 nuclear thermal propulsion engines.

But these pre-1973 designs relied on highly enriched uranium fuel. This fuel is no longer used because of its proliferation dangers, or dangers that have to do with the spread of nuclear material and technology.

The Global Threat Reduction Initiative, launched by the Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Administration, aims to convert many of the research reactors employing highly enriched uranium fuel to high-assay, low-enriched uranium, or HALEU, fuel.

High-assay, low- enriched uranium fuel has less material capable of undergoing a fission reaction, compared with highly enriched uranium fuel. So, the rockets needs to have more HALEU fuel loaded on, which makes the engine heavier. To solve this issue, researchers are looking into special materials that would use fuel more efficiently in these reactors.

NASA and the DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations, or DRACO, program intends to use this high-assay, low-enriched uranium fuel in its nuclear thermal propulsion engine. The program plans to launch its rocket in 2027.

As part of the DRACO program, the aerospace company Lockheed Martin has partnered with BWX Technologies to develop the reactor and fuel designs.

The nuclear thermal propulsion engines in development by these groups will need to comply with specific performance and safety standards. They’ll need to have a core that can operate for the duration of the mission and perform the necessary maneuvers for a fast trip to Mars.

Ideally, the engine should be able to produce high specific impulse, while also satisfying the high thrust and low engine mass requirements.

Ongoing research

Before engineers can design an engine that satisfies all these standards, they need to start with models and simulations. These models help researchers, such as those in my group, understand how the engine would handle starting up and shutting down. These are operations that require quick, massive temperature and pressure changes.

The nuclear thermal propulsion engine will differ from all existing fission power systems, so engineers will need to build software tools that work with this new engine.

My group designs and analyzes nuclear thermal propulsion reactors using models. We model these complex reactor systems to see how things such as temperature changes may affect the reactor and the rocket’s safety. But simulating these effects can take a lot of expensive computing power.

We’ve been working to develop new computational tools that model how these reactors act while they’re starting up and operated without using as much computing power.

My colleagues and I hope this research can one day help develop models that could autonomously control the rocket.The Conversation

Dan Kotlyar, Associate Professor of Nuclear and Radiological Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

The post Nuclear rockets could travel to Mars in half the time − but designing the reactors that would power them isn’t easy appeared first on theconversation.com

The Conversation

Marketing for cybersecurity products often leaves consumers less secure

Published

on

theconversation.com – Doug Jacobson, Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Iowa State University – 2025-01-02 07:27:00

Scare tactics might help sell security products, but they can actually make you less safe.

selimaksan/E+ via Getty Images

Doug Jacobson, Iowa State University

You have likely seen multiple ads for products and services designed to make you more secure online. When you turn on your television, see online ads, or even when you get in-app notifications, you are likely to encounter cybersecurity technology marketed as the ultimate solution and the last line of defense against digital threats.

Cybersecurity is big business, and tech companies often sell their products based on fear. These campaigns are often rooted in what I call the technology vs. user cycle, a feedback loop that creates more problems than it solves.

It works like this: Cybersecurity companies often market their products using tactics that emphasize fear (“Hackers are coming for your data!”), blame (“It’s your fault if something happens!”) and complexity (“Only our advanced solution can protect you”). They perpetuate the idea that users are inherently not savvy enough to manage security independently and that the solution is to adopt the latest product or service.

As a cybersecurity researcher, I find that this approach often has unintended, harmful consequences for people. Rather than feeling empowered, users feel helpless, convinced that cybersecurity is beyond their understanding. They may even develop techno-stress, overwhelmed by the need to keep up with constant updates, new tools and never-ending warnings about threats.

Over time, this can breed apathy and resentment. Users might disengage, believing that no matter what they do, they’ll always be at risk. Ironically, this mindset makes them more vulnerable as they begin to overlook simple, practical steps they could take to protect themselves.

The cycle is self-perpetuating. As users feel less secure, they are more likely to demand new technology to solve their problem, further fueling the very marketing tactics that created their insecurity in the first place. Security providers, in turn, double down on promises of fix-all solutions, reinforcing the narrative that people can’t manage security without their products.

Ironically, as people grow dependent on security products, they can become less secure. They start ignoring basic practices, become apathetic to constant warnings, and put blind trust in solutions they don’t understand.

The result is users remain stuck in a loop where they depend on technology but lack the confidence to use it safely, creating even more opportunities for people with malicious intent to exploit them.

Cybercrime evolution

I’ve worked in cybersecurity since the early 1990s and witnessed the field evolve over the decades. I’ve seen how adversaries adapt to new defenses and exploit people’s growing reliance on the internet. Two key shifts, in particular, stand out as pivotal moments in the evolution of cybercrime.

The first shift came with the realization that cybercrime could be immensely profitable. As society moved from paper checks and cash transactions to digital payments, criminals found that accessing and stealing money electronically was relatively easy. This transition to digital finance created opportunities for criminals to scale up their attacks, bypassing physical barriers and targeting the systems that underpin modern payment methods.

The second shift emerged over a decade ago as criminals targeted individuals directly rather than just going after businesses or governments. While attacks on companies, ransomware campaigns and critical infrastructure breaches still make headlines, there has also been a rise in attacks on everyday users. Cybercriminals have learned that people are often less prepared and more trusting than organizations, and so present lucrative opportunities.

This combination of digital financial systems and direct user targeting has redefined cybersecurity. It’s no longer just about protecting companies or critical infrastructure; it’s about ensuring the average person isn’t left defenseless. Yet, how cybersecurity technology is marketed and deployed often leaves users confused and feeling helpless.

two women, one seated and one standing, look at a computer monitor

Asking a knowledgeable friend or colleague is a good way to cut through the fear and confusion around cybersecurity.

Luis Alvarez/DigitalVision via Getty Images

User empowerment

The good news is that you have more power than you think. Cybersecurity doesn’t have to feel like an unsolvable puzzle or a job for experts alone. Instead of letting fear drive you into techno-stress or apathy, you can take matters into your own hands by leaning on trusted sources like community organizations, local libraries and tech-savvy friends.

These trusted voices can simplify the jargon, provide straightforward advice and help you make informed decisions. Imagine a world where you don’t have to rely on faceless companies for help but instead turn to a network of people who genuinely want to see you succeed.

I believe that cybersecurity vendors should offer tools and education that are inclusive, accessible and centered on real user needs. At the same time, people should actively engage with community-driven initiatives, adopt thoughtful security practices and rely on trusted resources for guidance. People feel more confident and capable when they surround themselves with people willing to teach and support them. Users can then adopt technology thoughtfully rather than rushing to buy every new product out of fear or disengaging completely.

This community-based approach goes beyond individual fixes. It creates a culture of shared responsibility and empowerment and helps create a more secure and resilient digital ecosystem.

Resources

Knowing where to find reliable information and support is essential to take control of your cybersecurity and start building your confidence. The following resource list includes trusted organizations, community programs and educational tools that can help you better understand cybersecurity, protect yourself against threats and even connect with local experts or peers for guidance.

Whether you’re looking to secure your devices, learn how to spot scams or stay informed about the latest digital threats, these resources are a great place to begin. Empowerment starts with taking that first step toward understanding your digital world.The Conversation

Doug Jacobson, Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Iowa State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

The post Marketing for cybersecurity products often leaves consumers less secure appeared first on theconversation.com

Continue Reading

The Conversation

Wildfire smoke’s health risks can linger long-term in homes that escape burning

Published

on

theconversation.com – Colleen E. Reid, Associate Professor of Geography, University of Colorado Boulder – 2024-12-23 11:00:00

The Marshall Fire spared some homes, shown here a day later, but smoke had blanketed the area.

Andy Cross/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Colleen E. Reid, University of Colorado Boulder

Three years ago, on Dec. 30, 2021, a wind-driven wildfire raced through two communities just outside Boulder, Colorado. In the span of about eight hours, more than 1,000 homes and businesses burned.

The fire left entire blocks in ash, but among them, pockets of houses survived, seemingly untouched. The owners of these homes may have felt relief at first. But fire damage can be deceiving, as many soon discovered.

When wildfires like the Marshall Fire reach the wildland-urban interface, they are burning both vegetation and human-made materials. Vehicles and buildings burn, along with all of the things inside them – electronics, paint, plastics, furniture.

Research shows that when human-made materials like these burn, the chemicals released are different from what is emitted when just vegetation burns. The smoke and ash can blow under doors and around windows in nearby homes, bringing in chemicals that stick to walls and other indoor surfaces and continue off-gassing for weeks to months, particularly in warmer temperatures.

An aerial view of burned neighborhoods with a few houses standing among burned lots and at the edges of the fire area.

The Marshall Fire swept through several neighborhoods in the towns of Louisville and Superior, Colo. In the homes that were left standing, residents dealt with lingering smoke and ash in their homes.

Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images

In a new study, my colleagues and I looked at the health effects people experienced when they returned to still-standing homes after the Marshall Fire. We also created a checklist for people to use after urban wildfires in the future to help them protect their health and reduce their risks when they return to smoke-damaged homes.

Tests in homes found elevated metals and VOCs

In the days after the Marshall Fire, residents quickly reached out to nearby scientists who study wildfire smoke and health risks at the University of Colorado Boulder and area labs. People wanted to know what was in the ash and causing the lingering smells inside their homes.

In homes we were able to test, my colleagues found elevated levels of metals and PAHs – polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons – in the ash. We also found elevated VOCs – volatile organic compounds – in airborne samples. Some VOCs, such as dioxins, benzene, formaldehyde and PAHs, can be toxic to humans. Benzene is a known carcinogen.

People wanted to know whether the chemicals that got into their homes that day could harm their health.

At the time, we could find no information about physical health implications for people who have returned to smoke-damaged homes after a wildfire. To look for patterns, we surveyed residents affected by the fire six months, one year and two years afterward.

Symptoms 6 months after the fire

Even six months after the fire, we found that many people were reporting symptoms that aligned with health risks related to smoke and ash from fires.

More than half (55%) of the people who responded to our survey reported that they were experiencing at least one symptom six months after the blaze that they attributed to the Marshall Fire. The most common symptoms reported were itchy or watery eyes (33%), headache (30%), dry cough (27%), sneezing (26%) and sore throat (23%).

All of these symptoms, as well as having a strange taste in one’s mouth, were associated with people reporting that their home smelled differently when they returned to it one week after the fire.

Many survey respondents said that the smells decreased over time. Most attributed the improvement in smell to the passage of time, cleaning surfaces and air ducts, replacing furnace filters, and removing carpet, textiles and furniture from the home. Despite this, many still had symptoms.

We found that living near a large number of burned structures was associated with these health symptoms. For every 10 additional destroyed buildings within 820 feet (250 meters) of a person’s home, there was a 21% increase in headaches and a 26% increase in having a strange taste in their mouth.

These symptoms align with what could be expected from exposure to the chemicals that we found in the ash and measured in the air inside the few smoke-damaged homes that we were able to study in depth.

Lingering symptoms and questions

There are a still a lot of unanswered questions about the health risks from smoke- and ash-damaged homes.

For example, we don’t yet know what long-term health implications might look like for people living with lingering gases from wildfire smoke and ash in a home.

We found a significant decline in the number of people reporting symptoms one year after the fire. However, 33% percent of the people whose homes were affected still reported at least one symptom that they attributed to the fire. About the same percentage also reported at least one symptom two years after the fire.

We also could not measure the level of VOCs or metals that each person was exposed to. But we do think that reports of a change in the smell of a person’s home one week after the fire demonstrates the likely presence of VOCs in the home. That has health implications for people whose homes are exposed to smoke or ash from a wildfire.

Tips to protect yourself after future wildfires

Wildfires are increasingly burning homes and other structures as more people move into the wildland-urban interface, temperatures rise and fire seasons lengthen.

It can be confusing to know what to do if your home is one that survives a wildfire nearby. To help, my colleagues and I put together a website of steps to take if your home is ever infiltrated by smoke or ash from a wildfire.

Here are a few of those steps:

  • When you’re ready to clean your home, start by protecting yourself. Wear at least an N95 (or KN95) mask and gloves, goggles and clothing that covers your skin.

  • Vacuum floors, drapes and furniture. But avoid harsh chemical cleaners because they can react with the chemicals in the ash.

  • Clean your HVAC filter and ducts to avoid spreading ash further. Portable air cleaners with carbon filters can help remove VOCs.

A recent scientific study documents how cleaning all surfaces within a home can reduce reservoirs of VOCs and lower indoor air concentrations of VOCs.

Given that we don’t know much yet about the health harms of smoke- and ash-damaged homes, it is important to take care in how you clean so you can do the most to protect your health.The Conversation

Colleen E. Reid, Associate Professor of Geography, University of Colorado Boulder

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

The post Wildfire smoke’s health risks can linger long-term in homes that escape burning appeared first on theconversation.com

Continue Reading

The Conversation

In Disney’s ‘Moana,’ the characters navigate using the stars, just like real Polynesian explorers − an astronomer explains how these methods work

Published

on

theconversation.com – Christopher Palma, Teaching Professor, Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics, Penn State – 2024-12-20 07:17:00

Wayfarers around the world have used the stars to navigate the sea.
Wirestock/iStock via Getty Images Plus

Christopher Palma, Penn State

If you have visited an island like one of the Hawaiian Islands, Tahiti or Easter Island, also known as Rapa Nui, you may have noticed how small these land masses appear against the vast Pacific Ocean. If you’re on Hawaii, the nearest island to you is more than 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) away, and the coast of the continental United States is more than 2,000 miles (3,200 kilometers) away. To say these islands are secluded is an understatement.

For me, watching the movie “Moana” in 2016 was eye-opening. I knew that Polynesian people traveled between a number of Pacific islands, but seeing Moana set sail on a canoe made me realize exactly how small those boats are compared with what must have seemed like an endless ocean. Yet our fictional hero went on this journey anyway, like the countless real-life Polynesian voyagers upon which she is based.

Oceania as shown from the ISS
Islands in Polynesia can be thousands of miles apart.
NASA

As an astronomer, I have been teaching college students and visitors to our planetarium how to find stars in our sky for more than 20 years. As part of teaching appreciation for the beauty of the sky and the stars, I want to help people understand that if you know the stars well, you can never get lost.

U.S. Navy veterans learned the stars in their navigation courses, and European cultures used the stars to navigate, but the techniques of Polynesian wayfinding shown in Moana brought these ideas to a very wide audience.

The movie Moana gave me a new hook – pun not intended – for my planetarium shows and lessons on how to locate objects in the night sky. With “Moana 2” out now, I am excited to see even more astronomy on the big screen and to figure out how I can build new lessons using the ideas in the movie.

The North Star

Have you ever found the North Star, Polaris, in your sky? I try to spot it every time I am out observing, and I teach visitors at my shows to use the “pointer stars” in the bowl of the Big Dipper to find it. These two stars in the Big Dipper point you directly to Polaris.

If you are facing Polaris, then you know you are facing north. Polaris is special because it is almost directly above Earth’s North Pole, and so everyone north of the equator can see it year-round in exactly the same spot in their sky.

It’s a key star for navigation because if you measure its height above your horizon, that tells you how far you are north of Earth’s equator. For the large number of people who live near 40 degrees north of the equator, you will see Polaris about 40 degrees above your horizon.

If you live in northern Canada, Polaris will appear higher in your sky, and if you live closer to the equator, Polaris will appear closer to the horizon. The other stars and constellations come and go with the seasons, though, so what you see opposite Polaris in the sky will change every month.

Look for the Big Dipper to find the North Star, Polaris.

You can use all of the stars to navigate, but to do that you need to know where to find them on every night of the year and at every hour of the night. So, navigating with stars other than Polaris is more complicated to learn.

Maui’s fishhook

At the end of June, around 11 p.m., a bright red star might catch your eye if you look directly opposite from Polaris. This is the star Antares, and it is the brightest star in the constellation Scorpius, the Scorpion.

If you are a “Moana” fan like me and the others in my family, though, you may know this group of stars by a different name – Maui’s fishhook.

If you are in the Northern Hemisphere, Scorpius may not fully appear above your horizon, but if you are on a Polynesian island, you should see all of the constellation rising in the southeast, hitting its highest point in the sky when it is due south, and setting in the southwest.

Astronomers and navigators can measure latitude using the height of the stars, which Maui and Moana did in the movie using their hands as measuring tools.

The easiest way to do this is to figure out how high Polaris is above your horizon. If you can’t see it at all, you must be south of the equator, but if you see Polaris 5 degrees (the width of three fingers at arm’s length) or 10 degrees above your horizon (the width of your full fist held at arm’s length), then you are 5 degrees or 10 degrees north of the equator.

The other stars, like those in Maui’s fishhook, will appear to rise, set and hit their highest point at different locations in the sky depending on where you are on the Earth.

Polynesian navigators memorized where these stars would appear in the sky from the different islands they sailed between, and so by looking for those stars in the sky at night, they could determine which direction to sail and for how long to travel across the ocean.

Today, most people just pull out their phones and use the built-in GPS as a guide. Ever since “Moana” was in theaters, I see a completely different reaction to my planetarium talks about using the stars for navigation. By accurately showing how Polynesian navigators used the stars to sail across the ocean, Moana helps even those of us who have never sailed at night to understand the methods of celestial navigation.

The first “Moana” movie came out when my son was 3 years old, and he took an instant liking to the songs, the story and the scenery. There are many jokes about parents who dread having to watch a child’s favorite over and over again, but in my case, I fell in love with the movie too.

Since then, I have wanted to thank the storytellers who made this movie for being so careful to show the astronomy of navigation correctly. I also appreciated that they showed how Polynesian voyagers used the stars and other clues, such as ocean currents, to sail across the huge Pacific Ocean and land safely on a very small island thousands of miles from their home.The Conversation

Christopher Palma, Teaching Professor, Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics, Penn State

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

The post In Disney’s ‘Moana,’ the characters navigate using the stars, just like real Polynesian explorers − an astronomer explains how these methods work appeared first on theconversation.com

Continue Reading

Trending