What is the fastest way to put trash into the Sun?

[willpittenger]

That may be, but if the craft fails to get escape velocity, it is coming back at you. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Name any launch vehicle that performs GTO missions, they could launch stuff to the sun."<br /><br />No they could not. Too much delta V is required to impact the Sun."<br /><br />Wrong. I never said for the same mass. Any launch vehicle that can put a payload into GTO, can put a smaller smaller payload towards the sun. And it doesn't have to go there directly

 

[spacelifejunkie]

It seems ironic that the best solution to the problem negates the very existence of the problem. For instance, the p/B11 fusion reaction is essentially radiation free. Therefore, why will we have the radiation problem in the first place? Also, the p/B11 fusion reaction can break down any radioactive material in short order. No need to send it to the sun.<br /><br />To stay in line with the thread, again a p/B11 fusion nuclear rocket will be the cheapest access to space imaginable right now. Maybe even cheaper than a space elevator. It might be possible to send it to the sun with either of these technologies. Chemical rockets, no way. A rail gun from the moon is good except we have to get the stuff to the moon first. Why land it and then launch it when we can just keep it going? Other than semi portable fusion power and space elevators, I don't see it feesible at all. <br /><br /><br />SLJ

 

[willpittenger]

Do you have a link to a Wikipedia page on p/B11? I couldn't find on? If not there, how about elsewhere?<br /><br />Also, that reactor doesn't do anything for the fuel rods that have been stacking up over the past 70 years. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[summoner]

Here's a good discussion of the p/B11 fusion reactor at Nasa space flight.<br /><br />Link <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> <br /><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:271px;background-color:#FFF;border:1pxsolid#999"><tr><td colspan="2"><div style="height:35px"><img src="http://banners.wunderground.com/weathersticker/htmlSticker1/language/www/US/MT/Three_Forks.gif" alt="" height="35" width="271" style="border:0px" /></div>

 

[henryhallam]

<font color="yellow">Any launch vehicle that can put a payload into GTO, can put a smaller smaller payload towards the sun. And it doesn't have to go there directly</font><br /><br />I don't think that's true. Consider the Ariane 5 ECA, a reasonably large and efficient launch vehicle that can put 10500kg to GTO. Let's use all of that 10.5 tonne capacity for an efficient upper stage (more generous than the stock launch vehicle that you proposed!) Something with a similar mass ratio to the Centaur V1 (i.e. mi/mf = 11). We'll fill this upper stage with propellants and put a pea-sized piece of Nasty Trash on top. With an Isp of 451 seconds and zero payload mass the upper stage manages a delta V of 10.6km/s. Wow, that's a lot! But it's not even 1/3 of what you need to drop into the sun. A series of gravity assists might do it. A single Jupiter gravity assist would certainly get you to solar escape velocity. But falling into the sun is *hard* and I won't believe that any GTO launcher could manage it without some supporting evidence.

 

[spacelifejunkie]

willpittenger,<br /><br />Here's another couple of links. Really cool stuff but a little technical.<br /><br />www.emc2fusion.org<br /><br />http://fusor.net/newbie/files/Ligon-QED-IE.pdf<br /><br />http://www.askmar.com/Fusion.html<br /><br /><br />This last one has a lot of links specific to propulsion.<br /><br /><br />SLJ<br />

 

[willpittenger]

I did not understand any of those links (yours or SpaceLifeJunkie's). It would help if some graphics showing cutaways were present. I tend to be more visual. The one think I got out of those links were that the system was a low-cost Fusion system. Other than that, it was all over my head. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[spacelifejunkie]

Try this video. It shows how the fusion reactor works. Once the reactor produces the He positive ions they in turn force electrons to flow in a wire. Think of the fusion reaction as direct current source, like a giant battery in a way. The insane amount of current generated can then be used to heat a gas (most likely H2) in chamber, just like a regular rocket. Except, no burning occurs. In fact, the H2 isn't even needed if you stay in the atmosphere. Air is the reaction mass and the only fuel is a very small supply of boron 11. Here's the link showing how the fusion reaction works.<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmp1cg3-WDY<br /><br /><br />SLJ

 

[scottb50]

Also, that reactor doesn't do anything for the fuel rods that have been stacking up over the past 70 years....<br /><br />If more efficient breeder reactors were buit we wouldn't have to deal with them either, they could be reprocessed for fuel. Unfortunately you mention reprocessing and evrybody starts seeing bombs. If you limit reprocessing to reasonable levels that doesn't become a factor anyway.<br /><br />A good example is the Iranian hysteria, they are developing the capability to enrich to 5% or so to produce a more efficient power plant. To make a bomb you have to enrich to 95%+. <br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

It took me 1.5 hours to download that video. And no, I saw nothing in there that suggested it was a fusion device. All they really showed was that it wasted electricity. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[spacelifejunkie]

Will, what do you mean by wasted? The video is a simple animation so it doesn't show every detail but it does show how the fusion process occurs. What it doesn't show is the products, the He ions that are ejected after the reaction. Those ions cause the useful electrical current. <br /><br />The idea is to drop and trap electrons with magnetic fields. Those electrons attract the protons and Boron 11 ions due to their opposite charge. In a vacuum, the ions are accelerated to enormous speed, all radially inward. The result is a collision in the core with enough energy for fusion to occur. A proton plus Boron 11 makes Carbon 12 in an energized state. The carbon 12 then fissions into beryllium and helium. The beryllium is short lived and quickly degrades into two heliums. The net result of each fusion event is three helium ions and very little radiation. Again, the video doesn't show the result of the fusion reaction, only the conditions necessary for it to occur.<br /><br /><br />SLJ

 

[j05h]

The practical way to dispose of trash in the Sun is to bury it on Earth and wait for solar expansion.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Wrong. The question is dropping a payload INTO the Sun, not AT the Sun. Present LVs could not evel drop their upper stage into the Sun."<br /><br />Ever hear of gravity assists, i.e. doesn't have to go there directly<br /><br />just stick to shuttle updates, I can handle the ELV missions, thank you

 

[CalliArcale]

I think it was meant to be speculative anyway, but you're right.<br /><br />Actually, the thread makes me think of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. (From memory; please excuse any errors.)<br /><br />". . . the beautiful planet Bethselamin is now so eroded from billions of tourists that any net imbalance between the amount you eat and the amount you excrete whilst on the planet is surgically removed on your departure. Thus, every time you go to the lavatory there, it is vitally important to get a receipt."<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

All I saw was the animations showing some electrons zipping around. The text was a waste of bandwidth. They could have used sound for that. Until your most recent post, I still couldn't figure out where the fusion was. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

1. Some scientists say that the Sun won't reach Earth.<br />2. By the time the Sun undergoes any measurable changes, all known languages will be extinct. How do you label something as dangerous for someone who doesn't know your languages? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

The entire discussion was intended to be hypothetical. The fuel rods were only an example of something that might be desirable to dispose of in such a manner. If you will read my other posts, you will find that, for the most part, I agree with you. However, I wanted to point out to everyone else how difficult it would be to reach the Sun. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

I would suggest hypothetical discussion do not belong in Missions and Launches. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

Delta II is sending Messenger to Mercury via a few gravity assists. Add a few more and the Sun is achievable. JPL is good at finding ways to get probes to their intended targets with gravity assists. Galileo is an example of using assists for destructive entry

 

[willpittenger]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>It seems to me that it would be easier and safer to simply launch our unwanted garbage into the outer solar system.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Minor trivial little technical problem with that: "What goes up must come down." So unless your garbage succeeds in achieving escape velocity...<br /><br /><br />BTW: One person did suggest a workable solution. He used a Solar Sail craft to deorbit the payload. I modified that as the sail would prevent the load from reaching the Sun by letting go. The payload would then fall into the Sun on its own while the sail craft would return to Earth for more. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[drwayne]

Not really about putting stuff *into* the sun, but interesting nonetheless:<br /><br />http://yarchive.net/space/orbits/reaching_the_sun.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[qso1]

J05H:<br />The practical way to dispose of trash in the Sun is to bury it on Earth and wait for solar expansion.<br /><br />Me:<br />The only trash usually considered for solar disposal is nuclear waste. By the time the sun expands...the half life of the waste would long since have been reached, rendering the waste no longer hazardous from a nuclear standpoint. <br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>> The only trash usually considered for solar disposal is nuclear waste. By the time the sun expands...the half life of the waste would long since have been reached, rendering the waste no longer hazardous from a nuclear standpoint.</i><br /><br />Exactly. Those radioactive resources are to valuable to dispose of. We might not be able to use all of it now, but it will power future breeder reactors. IMHO, of course. The idea of permanent disposal smacks of inefficiency to me. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Minor trivial little technical problem with that: "What goes up must come down." So unless your garbage succeeds in achieving escape velocity...<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Two points:<br /><br />1) It won't come back in if we raise its perigee sufficiently. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> Ulysses, for instance, orbits at about the distance of Jupiter. It never returns to the inner solar system.<br /><br />2) Escape velocity actually isn't that much of a problem; so far, five spacecraft have already achieved it! You just have to use gravity assists. Actually, in theory, with clever use of Lagrange points, moving stuff around the solar system may be a lot easier (provided you're not in a big hurry) than we tend to think. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>