Epic Tech Runs Cars & Homes For 1000 Years Without Gas Or Charging?

Nuclear Waste Batteries: Go to nordvpn.com/twobit to get a 2-year plan plus 4 additional months with a huge discount. It’s risk-free with Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee!
We cover a lot of battery breakthroughs, and it's easy to understand why. They will power more and more of our lives. From laptops and smartphones to electric cars and buses, we are officially in the decades of the battery. But how all those batteries will be produced is a point of contention, as the exotic materials required and the supply chains around them become increasingly fragile and contentious. So what if we could build batteries from nuclear waste? It solves the problem of nuclear waste and has the potential for batteries that can last hundreds and thousands of years without charging! And like so much around breakout tech, it's hard to separate the hype from the facts, so let's dive headlong into nuclear waste diamond batteries, and just how they will shape our world. This week on Two Bit da Vinci. Breakthrough Battery Can Power Your Home & Car For 1000 Years!
》》》SUPPORT THE SHOW!《《《
In-Depth Content @ www.twobitdavinci.com
Become a Patron! twobit.link/Patreon
Become a KZbin Member! geni.us/TwoBitMember
One Time Donation: geni.us/PaypalMe
》》》GOING SOLAR?《《《
Save 50% on Solar Inverters ⟫ geni.us/Inverters
Drone Quotes for Solar ⟫ geni.us/DroneQuote
》》》TWO BIT DA VINCI《《《
I'm Ricky, This is Two Bit da Vinci, and if you're interested in learning about the future of Technology, Energy & Transportation, subscribe & Join us for the ride!
》》》COMPANY OUTREACH 《《《
Sponsor A Video! [e-mail]
》》》CONNECT WITH US 《《《
Twitter 》 / twobitdavinci
Facebook 》 / twobitdavinci
Instagram 》 / twobitdavinci
Chapters
00:00 Introduction
01:24 Nuclear Waste Problem
02:03 Nuclear Waste Battery!
05:07 How They work
07:49 Recent Headlines
10:58 The Devil is in the Details
12:09 Efficiency
13:13 Fuel Availability
14:29 The True Future
17:38 Conclusion
what we'll cover
two bit da vinci,nuclear batttery,nuclear batteries,nuclear waste battery diamond,batteries made from nuclear waste,nuclear waste diamond battery,nuclear waste diamond batteries,nuclear waste batteries,nuclear waste battery,nuclear energy,nuclear waste,city labs,ndb,ndb battery,arkenlight diamond battery,arkenlight nuclear diamond battery,Truth About Nuclear Waste Batteries - NOT What You Think,nuclear diamond battery,nuclear diamond batteries, Nuclear Waste Batteries Last 28,000 Years Without Charging! Breakthrough Battery Can Power Your Home & Car For 1000 Years! This Insane Tech Combines, Nuclear Waste, Diamonds & Batteries, What if We Could Solve Nuclear Waste & Build a LIFETIME Battery? Epic Tech Runs Cars & Homes For 1000 Years Without Gas Or Charging?

[@TwoBitDaVinci]

Go to nordvpn.com/twobit to get a 2-year plan plus 4 additional months with a huge discount. It’s risk-free with Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee!

[@keithwhite5657]

I've had VPN since it started I've used all sorts of Vpns what I've noticed is they can stop and even the application can sign out , what you don't realise is your provider or a third party can sign you out and turn your VPN off so it's not as safe as you think and on some application can still tell you your connected on VPN but when you go into the application it's off so I'm starting to not trust theses applications .

[@anthonylosego]

Embedded in concrete, creating noise EMF never to shut off and literally EVERYWHERE. That sounds excellent right up until we realize we can't connect to the cellular network anymore due to interference. Then we have to find a way to get at those chips running forever in our concrete in a cheap and effective way. This could not only be a great thing, but also a great disaster as well. Caution is advised.

[@baneverything5580]

Nuclear batteries were being used in the 1970s. Voyager missions.

[@renitadykstra1123]

What about the "for now" usage of the waste until it is gone? Shut down plants as the planet transitions. It is called " Best Practice Approach" Seems to me that this is starting to go in the right direction BUT needs awareness that it is not the "solution" and has a end date. I personally think they are better options. Just like everything else " every case is based on it's own merits " and in this case it is based on current populated areas 1st etc.

[@keithwhite5657]

@@renitadykstra1123 the problem is going in the right direction is going to slow and the biggest worry is the population growth and it's demand is just out of control more homes more trees to log more sewage problems , less farmland because of housing developments that means more water more flooding . You need a reduce population to get out of this mess and read about Dr Keith and his geo engineering idea that's been spraying the atmosphere of aluminium oxide for years now that we all breathe in that reflects the sun's rays but also heats up the planet quicker and that means the ocean is rising due to ice melting that is accelerating faster every year . Methane is pouring into the atmosphere also at an alarming rate that comes to another theory that Dr Stephen Hawking predicted Venus syndrome effect and methane is far more worse basically a 120 times more worse than co2 , there's only one way for this direction is to reduce the population as quick as possible .

[@kalrandom7387]

My first major question right now is who funded the anti-nuclear power movement? I'm really wondering if it wasn't big oil companies?

[@spookychest9210]

Oil and Green energy aswell.

[@b_uppy]

We have a huge supply of spent nuclear fuel, zero conspiracies. We have enough to manage all our current battery needs and can easily store surplus-generated power until its needed. These batteries would be something managed by power companies. We still need other types of batteries because having a nuclear battery for your hearing aid (aka at home use) is really bad idea...

[@thesjkexperience]

If you lived through the 1970s you would understand the no nukes movement. Until this channel educated me on this battery and the new Japanese nuke plants I too was somewhat anti-nuke (and anti big oil). Unlike many, I keep an open mind and am excited about this superior technology.

[@-opus]

common sense

[@andrewday3206]

Don’t forget coal provided for 52% of the USA’s electricity generation

[@duran9664]

Ricky always gives us hope in the first half of his show just to destroy all of it in the last half. 🤦‍♀️

[@digiryde]

You make it sound like an investment or insurance sales pitch... lmao

[@guycha0s380]

Clickbait

[@Ozjockey111]

@@digiryde yeah people do actually invest in these types of things, so knowing the treue bottom line is a killer advantage

[@IronDragonGroup]

Damn straight

[@ThinkingBetter]

This video is factual and well done. 99% of videos online about NDB are repeating the fraud that NDB promotes.

[@MrZoomZone]

Good that you point out the difference between power density and energy density. The power from a battery is the RATE at which it can deliver energy. One Watt of power is a Watthour of energy per hour . The battery might contain a lot of energy but it cannot be practically delivered at a high rate that would be useful for things like electric cars. (People sometimes talk rubbish about Watts per hour. That is a red flag. There is no such thing. Watts are ALREADY a RATE. They probably mean Watthours per hour; Watts)

[@Ozjockey111]

Thanks for making that video. I wondered how much of the NDB noise was hype and you Ricky are the only one on the web that could actually do it the right justice with no spin! Thanx again mate!

[@WileHeCoyote]

Thank you Ricky! It always bothered me when everyone talked about ev's immediately after talking up nuclear batteries. Skipping over how hard it would be to get 5w device and going straight to 10kw devices like vehicles, they explain the "energy density" Mean while ignoring the orders of magnitude off the "power density" is. Your car isn't gonna have a range of 10,000,000 miles if it can't move itself in the first place!!

[@danidas]

The idea is for the car to still have a normal battery in addition to the nuclear battery that will slowly recharge it. So you can drive a few miles, park the car for a few hours/days then drive another few miles all with out ever plugging it in.

[@junkerzn7312]

@@danidas Just not gonna happen. We're talking almost 9 orders of magnitude difference in power. Or to put it another way, one crank of a hand-cranked generator like you see on those emergency radios will put out more energy than one of these batteries could put out in ten years. One crank. That's how bad it is.

[@truthseeker1364]

@@danidas why not just have the regular battery be the nuclear battery your main battery

[@danidas]

@@truthseeker1364 The nuclear battery will never produce enough power to run the car. As been pointed out and at most can only hope to very slowly recharge another battery. Think of it as a small solar panel plugged into your car to recharge it over time.

[@truthseeker1364]

@@danidas I'm sure they have the technology to make a nuclear battery that big they probably just won't for safety reasons and politics

[@vmoutsop]

Seems like it could be a good solution in a computer for maintaining time and settings instead of a round cell battery

[@stevenschmidt]

Great video! Although I was surprised you didn't mention the nuclear batteries that NASA has used to power space probes such as the Voyager spacecraft or the Curiosity rover on Mars. Those produce over a hundred watts of power continuously for over 20 years! and are the size of a suitcase roughly, as far as I understand. I just googled it. They're called Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs). Maybe do a follow-on video on that tech? is there a possibility it could become more widespread in the future? My understanding is that the biproducts of Thorium/Molten-Salt reactors can be used to make these kinds of generators.

[@OpticalLimit]

Well, it probably just means they are using several kg of plutonium-238 to produce the electricity. An article I just read on powermag called "The Nuclear Battery Aboard Perseverance, the Next-Gen Mars Rover" says Perseverance can generate 110 watts of power (specifically at the start of the mission as it will likely decrease as it ages) with about 4.8 kg of plutonium. So if we do the math to see how it compares to what is presented in the video: 110 watts / 4.8 kg plutonium = 22.92 watts per kg plutonium which as a percent of the total theoretical is (22.92 / 510) = 0.045 = 4.5%. So according to NASA's calculations, they are able to capture about 4.5% of the theoretical 510 watt output per kilogram of plutonium-238 which is a little better than the 3% average achievable power mentioned in the video. Hope this was illuminating to some degree.

[@nilsdock]

he did mention them

[@stevenschmidt]

@@nilsdock He mentioned the type of battery but not the details of the ones used by NASA.

[@MattOGormanSmith]

Plutonium ones will never be allowed to fall into civilian hands. You don't need to make a bomb to destroy a city with that much Pu. It's enough to fatally poison millions if you got it in the water, the air or the food.

[@davidelliott5843]

The RTGs used by NASA have a serious fuel supply problem. Due to regulatory controls, nobody is reprocessing the material. Right now, they have almost no Plutonium for the job. A far cheaper option uses a fast spectrum reactor to literally finish using the stored “waste” we have at every existing nuclear plant. Moltex and Elysium both have the tech to do it. Subject to nuclear regulatory bodies allowing any sort of progress.

[@MrElifire84]

Great video and quality info. Kudos. 2 things to add tho. #1. Virtually everyone has been using Nuclear batteries in their homes already for some time. They are in your Fire detectors. A small charge of Americium 241 as an Alpha emitter creates a ionized air channel that the detectors sense as a closed circuit. When smoke blocks the Alphas the ionization stops and the circuit opens and the alarm goes off. So almost everyone is benefiting from weapons grade, man made, Nuclear material in their homes right now! Makes ya think no? #2. Nuclear waste is not Nuclear energy’s biggest problem. It is its best feature. It is the only waste from energy production that is already contained as a matter of routine procedure. Can’t say that about coal, oil, gas,or renewables! Also, It is absolutely minimal in amount for the power produced vs any other energy source. Add that it is the only waste from energy production that actually goes away on its own given time. All other waste lasts forever. And it’s never hurt anyone! Yes it’s radioactive, but we know how to stop that with shielding. And we already know how to deal with it long term despite the foolish claims to the contrary. Time to stop fearing it and get on with using it.

[@klepow]

Okay, so the battery essentially lasts forever, but what about the rest of the product? How do we keep them from being tossed in the trash, and ending up in landfills? Also for pacemakers, and other implants, will they have to be removed before burial, or cremation?

[@Hydrogenblonde]

What do we currently do with the billions of Americium 241 domestic smoke detectors that will eventually get thrown away? Answer : as usual, nothing. Throw them in the trash.

[@Kalleosini]

you gotta toss it in the trash so you can buy more. in a perfect world you'd extract the battery and put it in the replacement device, but there is no way apple is going to let their radioactive iphone batteries be compatible with other versions of their iphones. They would change the shape of the seating or the housing or both for every new version of their product.

[@joeee7943]

If it’s not safe and humans don’t get destroyed by this product, maybe they will work. But, we should not be fooled by the foolers that want to profit for the greedy people. Plus, enforcement of humans would have to recycle and handle this product 100000000% safe.

[@motophone8794]

@@joeee7943 these ideas are ...smh...but I'm wanting to know who in the world is using AA batteries in his watch?? All of my watches have required watch batteries and they don't last for years...maybe not even one year.

[@rodjacksonx]

Considering how much these batteries will cost (lasting 20 years and all,) people will be highly incentivized to keep (and reuse or even resell) the battery when throwing away the product.

[@carmanconrad8684]

Nice to see how at least one company has something that is commercially viable and is going to have very positive impact as time goes by.

[@psiga]

There's a video from Joe Scott about a year ago which should interest you, titled "Nuclear Waste Is Manageable. We Just Have To Do It." And another from Kyle Hill 7 months ago, titled "We Solved Nuclear Waste Decades Ago" Your assessment of them would be appreciated, TBdV. _More eyes and mouths on this topic keeps hope alive._

[@drfirechief8958]

Kind of ties into my earlier comment.

[@firefox39693]

When you mentioned that these batteries use waste from nuclear power plants, I got really excited. I thought these batteries could be the silver bullet that could make large ocean-going vessels go 100% electric, without the need for hydrogen. Nope. I got ahead of myself.

[@shmadmanuts]

There is no silver bullet. There are steel ones - make the political decision to advance nuclear waste processing (yes, processing, not storing) It might be costly at first to develop such programs, but the main thing in stopping such was not money, but nuclear non-proliferation - aka the fear of nuclear weapons. Look what that did to the globe - Europe started stopping its NPPs, got more and more dependent of natural gas, fueled VVP's desires... and now Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is... threatening to burn to the ground the whole world. Vicious circle indeed.

[@antd8667]

As long as u never get a ship crash or sink in a harbor

[@everythingpony]

No you are correct

[@TheWadetube]

You would have to combine multiple technologies. Use the isotope as a cathode and graphite, and you have your battery, use the heat couplers and the diamond layer and the solar panel casing... Getting 350 to 400 kilowatt hours per kilogram would be great.

[@xafar67]

I was in the audience when Professor Tom Scott of the University of Bristol Cabot Institute gave a speech introducing the notion of a betavoltaic cell using 14C in the form of diamond-like carbon in 2015. A 63Ni prototype has been made, however no 14C yet

[@perjohanaxell9862]

Good video. Your honest and realistic approach is great. From what you said it feels a little strange to call them batterys. There more like self sustaining pv cells.

[@chrisschembari2486]

No, only one of the technologies Ricky briefly mentioned involves PV cells. Most of the video focuses on betavoltaics, which directly emit electrons. Not PV cells at all.

[@mikebutler9262]

THANK YOU... Love to see both sides of a realistic opportunity. Mike

[@RolandGustafsson]

Just as lithium was considered too dangerous for batteries until John B Goodenough figured out how to do it, same goes for portable nuclear energy batteries. Eagerly awaiting this tech! I believe it is possible! 🙂

[@ahaveland]

Just because Goodenough found a way to make lithium useful does not at all mean that there is a any path whatsoever to make natural radioactive decay a source of similar power. The two things are completely different physics.

[@joeshumo9457]

Safety is only one out of many problems to say the least. The Universe doesn’t allow for any free lunches.

[@chrisbraid2907]

Portable nuclear energy might also consume Gold and Lead to protect us from radiation since these are two of the best radiation shielding materials.

[@pieceD399]

@@joeshumo9457 The Universe didnt allow us to fly , comunicate at long distances , tale pictures , etc , yet we are doing it Some centuries to get here but we did it Whats possible and impossible is hard to know , all we can say is : With our current knowleadge and teconology is impossible ( thats all ) ( if this was our limit we wouldnt be evolving everyday like we are )

[@ahaveland]

@@pieceD399 True, because physics allowed them. However, some things are thermodynamically impossible, and will remain impossible until the end of the Universe.

[@johnhoward3271]

My two main concerns with this type of batteries are ( 1 ) what happens IF and , or WHEN they leak ( Whom is responsible for damages) ( 2 ) The actual cost of these batteries ( and cost of preparing for applications )

[@sjcabbw]

the cost for cleaning the leak may be much higher than the electricity it can provide.

[@exosproudmamabear558]

​​@@sjcabbwIt wont these are small nuclear wastes that has low radioactivity. The only cost they can bring if the leak happens is surgery to remove it and cancer risk it brings

[@jeremiahbohatkiewicz1670]

When I imagine linking something like this to your home’s breaker box, the word disruptive becomes woefully inadequate. 😂

[@eventhisidistaken]

At 100 uW continuous, it can charge a 9V smoke detector battery (typically about 600 mAh) in less than a year, which means we could already have such a thing if someone were to manufacture it. Imagine never having to change the backup battery on your wired smoke alarm. To power a house you would need

[@Tarik360]

We are essentially in the 1800's 2.0. Lots of old tech concepts being implemented due to new precision tools but a lot more things being conceptualized that is just beyond our means to realize at the moment.

[@everythingpony]

This isn't the 1800s, this is tech we have and use today

[@Tarik360]

@@everythingpony exactly what I meant?

[@AnAngelineer]

Your last part indirectly points out a risk of a different kind : energy solutions might actually empower government spying and surveillance states to a degree that we have never seen before. That makes it even more important to be aware about those technologies, so we can keep an eye on how they intend to be used.

[@UnknownUser-rb9pd]

We've shown that most of us are quite happy to allow Government and commercial organisations to spy and carry out surveillance voluntarily, through our online activities and phone usage. And safety and insurance concerns are already accelerating that monitoring with employee body cameras and tracking of people's activities at work, children being monitored throughout their lives from baby monitors to location devices and CCTV cameras in public buildings and on the street for transport monitoring and crime prevention. I think it is safe to say that we are happy to give up our freedoms if it means that we are safer and have the services of Apple or Google with us all the time.

[@-opus]

They are always after me lucky charms!

[@williamclark6466]

Absolutely fascinating!!! Thank you for another very informative video.

[@XtomJamesExtra]

Well there are a few things missed in this video, but good all-around info. Nuclear diamond batteries using Carbon-14 isn't relying on the C14 decay, but the radioactive capture from the use as control rods in nuclear reactors. So power density is actually higher than simple C14. Bearing in mind that NDP has only demonstrated micro-level batteries with their design. So their claim isn't as far off as this video suggests. But also, when it comes to phones, laptops, and tech, what's being ignored is the fact we're headed to a Pico level architecture in the very near future. TSMC has already reached the theoretical "limit" of microarchitecture with their still in testing 1 nanometer FinFETS, and researchers have already found a way to shrink FinFETS below one nanometer. With smaller and smaller circuitry, less and less power is needed for otherwise similar performance. So phones in the near future might not need an 8000 mah battery to operate for long periods of time. Tablets, laptops, and other gadgets will also be produced with similar lower power consumption hardware, leading to lower overall power needs. Theoretically, a smart phone that is produced at sub-nanometer (picometer range) with the same performance as a flagship phone today, would require as little as 1/100th the power. So NDP's' diamond batteries might just provide that power need especially if they can get to the 8-10 mah range in power production without increased bulk. The other thing is, technically speaking, the radioactive carbon used to make their diamond batteries could be forced into sheets of graphene, which could make the very radioactive carbon into its own capacitor.

[@Ohiostategenerationx]

My dad actually talked about nuclear battery power back in the 90s. If you you good lead to encase it you can actually use it to power your home for hundreds of year's.

[@baneverything5580]

Nuclear batteries were being used in the 1970s. Voyager Spacecraft are powered by them.

[@Ohiostategenerationx]

@@baneverything5580 Yeah I know that but my dad passed away in the 90s and when I was a teenager that's when he told me about it

[@3DLasers]

You could already purchase Strotium 90 Powered Generators back in the '70’s, they were advertising them in the "Scientific American" magazines and if memory serves they needed to be refueled with spent nuclear fuel every 20 years...

[@Ohiostategenerationx]

@@3DLasers ok

[@3DLasers]

@@Ohiostategenerationx I can see you're another Scientific American... 😃 🌎 🇺🇸

[@joetrolo7076]

I saw something about these recently. It just seems so many of these great breakthroughs never seem to turn into anything, or there's some catch. But I'll remain optimistic, because you do!

[@baneverything5580]

Nuclear batteries were being used in the 1970s. Voyager Spacecraft are powered by them.

[@joetrolo7076]

@@baneverything5580 yes, most are space or medicine... I would just like to see a leap in technology for the average users

[@baneverything5580]

@@joetrolo7076 Well, LiFeP04 batteries for off grid solar power is a leap in technology and very few can afford them. Just one 300 ah battery, 2000w inverter, and 60 amp MPPT charge controller plus a 20 amp AC plug in charger cost me 1700 bucks. I used the last of my savings to get it after putting a good roof over my camper. I`m on SSI and receive a small check. And rising prices for food, medicine, and utilities has put an abrupt halt to finishing my system for emergencies. I need a lot more solar panels, safety fuses, breakers, combiner box, cables, backup inverter and charge controller, etc, and can`t afford to eat properly now. I can`t even afford repairs to my leaking water pipes to have a flushing toilet or running water now. Biden lied about helping the disabled and elderly. He`s killing us.

[@joetrolo7076]

@@baneverything5580 hang in there brother! And yes I agree about Brandon being a liar. I'm getting up there myself and I am looking for ways to make my retirement inexpensive. Have a good thanksgiving! We all have something to be thankful for.😉

[@ronenglish1590]

Great application would be to power remote air travel equipment and weather stations. There are several remote pieces of navigation located in north america that rely on constant power to operate. One of the biggest challenges is fuelling and insuring equipment is maintained. This form of battery at a larger scale could be very useful and cost effective.

[@blue_tree_meadow]

I think one of the problems is perspective, everyone seems to be looking for a new fuel, when a more relevant solution might be to try and find a new method of efficient conversion of kinetic/heat energy into electricity on the medium to large scale initially, eventually scaling down perhaps. Obviously alongside all other renewable sources. Kinetic motion and heat exchange occur all around us all of the time, we're just not very good at harnessing it. 👍

[@cj3720]

Just wonder how they would encase it to prevent the radioactivity from affecting people near it. It probably lasts far longer than any type of a metal surrounding it.

[@chadmcquade3075]

Wouldn't take much to block it it's beta an alpha radiation same thing that gives you a sun burn so doesn't take much to block

[@alvarofernandez5118]

Metal case ought to do it. This isn't gamma radiation.

[@alvarofernandez5118]

Key point is not all radiation is the same, and radiation isn't like the One Ring. Concrete buildings give off radiation. Coal ash from coal power plants give off some radiation. The sun bathes us in it. The radiation from these batteries isn't the same even as an x-ray. If anything I'm concerned we're overstating the usefulness of these batteries. *Lithium Ion batteries aren't particularly benign for the environment either.* Too much of the environmental movement is taken up not by sober assessments of relative harm, but by religiosity and ritual, by reflexive repudiation of solutions if they don't sound right, or don't cause enough ritual discomfort to those who have "sinned" against Mother Earth.

[@cj3720]

@@alvarofernandez5118 Thanks!

[@tybozo]

knew it sounded too good to be feasibly possible. i think the arc reactor would work better, more power and you can build it in a cave

[@oleonard7319]

As radioactive decay cannot be stopped, sped up, or slowed down easily, there is no way to "switch off" the battery or regulate its power output. For some applications this is irrelevant, but others will need a backup chemical battery to store energy when it isn't needed for when it is. This reduces the advantage of high power density.

[@tkskagen]

With this video, you just earned a new subscriber. Thank you!

[@rtfazeberdee3519]

Could they be used as the power for standby functions on things like TVs, cookers, etc instead of using mains power?

[@shmadmanuts]

NO! 1MWh of such vampires costs as much as a regular MWh putting such batteries to power the stand-by function is cost prohibitive. This would make sense only in something not connected to the power grid. Something consuming extremely small amounts of energy.

[@mrm7058]

I am a bit skeptical about the 28000 years claim. Yes, the waste may deliver enough energy for that long, but can we build a battery that survives 28000 years of radiation and corrosion? Nevertheless a great idea to use nuclear waste instead of just bury it.

[@junkerzn7312]

Oh, that part of it is real enough. The 'battery' is solid state plus there are no actual chemical processes going on. Its not a chemical battery. But it produces so little power that it just isn't useful beyond extremely low-power sensing applications.

[@Mark-ef7pi]

Thank you Ricky for the research and information. Science news & breakthroughs are so often just dead ends, the nuclear diamond battery is a perfect example of developers or IPO's trying to hype a product that can't deliver as promised.

[@dloman77]

Super awesome content! Nitpik comment on decay graphic: Gama is spelled Gamma. Keep up the wonderful content Ricky!

[@SteveGouldinSpain]

I was struck by the memory of that kid who built a nuclear reactor in his garage by scraping the radium from watch displays and firealarms. His skin didn't look too good in the mugshots. There's always someone who will abuse tech like this!

[@TheRoland444]

americium not radium

[@lylek8933]

For micro-powered devices (watches {sans smart watches}, sensors and such, this is indeed a viable power source, but to power things like cars/homes or even smartphones, I don't see this being viable any time soon. :)

[@williambixby3785]

Not for the regular people anyway lol

[@eventhisidistaken]

Not in this form factor. But if it could be provided in a form factor that is 100x more energy dense, then things like cars and homes become realistic.

[@rodjacksonx]

@@eventhisidistaken - No. You need far more than 100x density. Again: to power a hair dryer, it would take an 11-ton battery. 22,000 pounds. Even at 100x the density, you still wind up with a single battery that weighs 220 pounds and can only run your hair dryer. That's it. Even 1000x the density would, AT BEST, only make it viable for installed settings such as a home, MAYBE. Still wouldn't be good enough for a device that can move it's own weight.

[@eventhisidistaken]

@@rodjacksonx You would not directly power the car from these, you would use them to trickle charge conventional batteries. They charge 24/7, and for that, at 10x density, you could get about 30 minutes of driving per day, which makes it a viable commuter vehicle (based on the concept 'solar car', not a tesla). At 100x, you can now drive about 5 hours a day, which makes it viable as a primary vehicle for a lot of people.

[@rodjacksonx]

@@eventhisidistaken - "They charge 24/7, and for that, at 10x density, you could get about 30 minutes of driving per day" No you couldn't. It would take literally tens of millions of those batteries to get even a modest charge within 24 hours at current densities, which still means millions at 10x density. You will NEVER use ANY of these for anything AT ALL related to moving an electric car. EVER. It's like no one actually bothered to listen to anything in the video past the first half....

[@patrickmckowen2999]

I remember Arthur C Clarke talking nuclear batteries/ power cells in a book. I think it's time to go back and reread his stories. Cheers

[@amphibiousone7972]

Nice shallow drive. Good Stuff Boss

[@arthurflint1592]

The places that these would be allowed to compete with other batteries must be very small. I can just imagine the push back from small battery suppliers. Imagine all the batteries in keyboard/mouse combos that could be replaced., and "never" be replaced again. You would never have to buy any of those "old fashion" batteries again. Someone would complain and complain very loudly. I truly wish these companies well, but humans will human as they always do, and I don't expect them to become a large market provider.

[@shmadmanuts]

This batteries will be EXPENSIVE. Compared to a regular alkaline one, for the lowly keyboard. Right now, other than the smart watch to almost never have to be charged in power saving mode.... it's hard for me to think of something so expensive and small to be worth the bother. I forgot the last time I swapped the batteries in the keyboard I'm typing at, maybe a year ago - I wouldn't pay 30% more to not have to change batteries once a year.

[@thotluck5148]

Imagine Draggin' a radioactive battery around in your heart.

[@aarondewindt]

Already a thing, nuclear batteries have been used in pacemakers for decades. Current tech nuclear batteries are great for low power applications where replacing the battery is difficult or impossible. In the case of pacemakers the patient actually needs an open heart surgery in order to replace the battery, or in practice the entire pacemaker. Thanks to nuclear batteries one pacemaker may last for the patient's entire lifetime. However lithium ion batteries have become more and more popular the past decade or two because they can be made lighter, smaller and last long enough, 10 to 15 years. Another advantage is that since the entire pacemaker is replaced, patients also receive new pacemakers with new and improved technology every decade or so. The development we are seeing in this video is new nuclear battery technology that may allow for pacemakers that are even smaller than lithium ion. So nuclear pacemakers might make a comeback sometime soon.

[@thotluck5148]

@@aarondewindt Thank you very much for your information. I enjoyed your writing. I was just making a joke about the song "Radioactive" by Imagine Dragons.

[@c.t.murray3632]

I think it's a positive result with that Nano tritium battery especially in medicine. It would solve a lot of health problems. And my only concern was contamination from the nuclear material which he answered as being stopped by paper. Good answer I'd like to see it in print too. I think this is exciting.

[@eservicesplus1]

Fascinating and enlightening - thanks for your channel

[@marilynlucas5128]

Hey Ricky? How are you doing? I am hoping to get featured on your platform sometime in the future. I am currently working on a Tritium battery. It's a very interesting process. I've started with a Beta voltaic cell. Imagine filling up your car with tritiated water? then the Beta particles from the tritiated water is used up by a Beta Voltaic cell. I think I am on to something here.

[@MrArtist7777]

Create a company, produce a prototype and deliver your results to the scientific community first, to see if you actually have a possible product or just a floating idea. There's about as many battery ideas out there as there are sands on a beach but only a small number of them are actually practical and marketable.

[@marilynlucas5128]

@@MrArtist7777 ok. I am on it.

[@MrArtist7777]

From all of the battery ideas I've seen and heard of over the past 20+ years, NASA's SABERS solid-state battery seems to be the most promising as they've actually created multiple prototypes and have tested them for results and are a non-profit org. that has no motivation to produce false info. Either way, I think the solid-state batts are our best hope for future batteries over the next 20+ years.

[@WileHeCoyote]

I hope so, unfortunately, "Non profits" and college lab spin-off's have a tendency to move incredibly slow when it comes to bring anything "to market"

[@IhabFahmy]

NASA has "no motivation to produce fake info"? Really? Firstly, they're a government agency... and those don't have the best reputation for truthfulness, as I'm sure you will agree. Secondly, NASA is staffed by engineers and administrators... just like any human beings they compete for next year's funding in order to keep their jobs. That's a lot of motivation to fudge the data. I'm not saying whether NASA fakes results or not. I'm just logically contesting your claim that they have no motivation to do so.

[@martw3240]

i am thinking ,about a nail polish/varnish, with photo voltaic properties, wirelessly connected to your pacemaker. As I understand, the heart requires 21 milli amps> Is this feasible or should I sack my circuit board of connectors?

[@JonathanHarvell]

Oh no!! You misspelled Gamma! But the actual content of your video is great, as always!

[@jdd1777]

I think this tech is even more promising than fusion

[@Robert_McGarry_Poems]

Thanks. This is a huge problem that needs a solution. It really shouldn't be that difficult if humanity puts it's brain power to it.

[@alexpetrov9911]

hmm, FNR is the answer. China and Russian already using them in production. FNR is fast neutron reactor, sodium-cooled pool-type fast-neutron nuclear reactor is 50-60x times more efficient, more safe, closed loop cycle and can use waste from regular nuclear reactors as fuel. Fast neutron reactors are a technological step beyond conventional power reactors vastly more efficient use of uranium resources and the ability to burn actinides which are otherwise the long-lived component of high-level nuclear waste.

[@lanep2023]

How can we get micro-amp batteries to transmit (how much) data some distance?

[@TheRealBurtL]

ANSWER IS: Nope "Epic Tech WILL NOT Runs Cars & Homes For 1000 Years ... I just saved you 19 min of brains time.

[@davidhunter1538]

You do not want nuclear batteries in public hands. What if some group damaged a truck load of these batteries and dumped them in a major city dam? Anyone remember the Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway? We'd have to shut off the dam. Shut off the dam to a major city ! Do you understand the implications? Forget it.

[@whisperingsage89]

Do you mean private hands? Nuclear reactors and waste are *already* in public hands.

[@Goodwalker720]

The isotopes are bound to another element, so they don’t leech into the environment. This is an existing technology- I believe France already burns low and mid level waste and encapsulates the fumes in glass. Second, the amount of radioactivity needed is low enough that the battery as a whole is within safe limits. So unless you open the battery and eat the isotope infused material, you’ll be fine.

[@macjonte]

We had nuclear stuff in fire beepers in every home for decades. But yes, it’s a problem when many countries, including the US can’t even recycle glass, aluminum or plastic. Not ready for a new recycling system for nuclear waste.

[@johnschneider931]

What part of encased in diamond do you not understand. The energy used to kill someone with these can be done for a lot less effort, in attacking our computers, powerlines dams, etc. You can dump these in a lake with no effect. Drilling thru diamond with diamond is a losing problem.

[@SoCal_rnr]

@@johnschneider931 can't expect someone who's scared of nuclear to see past their nuclear assumptions

[@simplesimon4957]

You have a great channel. I have learned so much from your channel and you really seem to cover the subject really well.

[@TwoBitDaVinci]

I appreciate that... hope to hear from you in the coming year! cheers and happy new year!

[@simplesimon4957]

@@TwoBitDaVinci Thank you you too.

[@tigwelders-1076]

One type of battery I recently learned about on curiosity stream that you have not covered. Mechanical batteries like the concrete block and crane battery.

[@vueport99]

UPS used hydraulic "battery" in their trucks to capture the braking power rather than going to a battery. Fast and efficient

[@uneaverageME]

Theyre saying you can insert the pacemaker through the artery. This means potentially less invasive surgeries. No more splitting your chest open to put one in or change out the battery. Game changer

[@TheBlade996]

So your description is just click-bait? Great job!

[@koolkevin2357]

Thanks for the knowledge! Well done! Still a lot of great uses (I did not know, of any uses outside of aerospace) Quite Cool!

[@Embassy_of_Jupiter]

Remember the thermophotovoltaic cells you talked about, converting light from 1000-2000°C heat into energy at 30-40% efficiency? I wonder if we could use those to build a simple compact high-power nuclear reactor.

[@ordinal2361]

Glad you enjoyed my video

[@PeterretePinfo]

only cold fucion with comparing with solid state battery to keep stable value regardles from everionments.. but short curcuit called nuclear reaction in propper version also have bright future.. Unfortunetally not on current solutions.. these small ones are nice for devices but only..is many many versions but still small for vechicles.. but nice to hear direction in progress and nice material

[@InimitaPaul]

No way a near endless battery will ever be allowed to make it to market, if they don’t find an issue they’ll “find an issue”.

[@TwoBitDaVinci]

In the right use cases it will find a way... i.e. sensors etc.

[@donabaypro6782]

This video sparked an idea of hybrid power in electronic devices. Nuclear batteries may not be able to power screens or radio and other components; however just powering could reduce the amount of used in the regular batteries. This could give longer usable hours of a device without out having to redesign current technology, mostly li-ion.

[@skjenco]

I find it hard to comprehend the magnitude of big values. I found this interesting for perspective. From wikipedia "The nuclear reactors that power some aircraft carriers typically use up their nuclear fuel about halfway through their desired 50-year life spans." I cannot think of anything more powerful then a floating city propel at 35mph by way of a 260,000 horsepower motor and doesn't need to be refueled for 20 years. Not sure where, how or what but fission/ nuclear decay solutions are worth the investigation as non fossil fuel solutions.

[@romado59]

Do you have a filter-blocker on the number post? Because I have check back on some post to see the response and there is no post!

[@martinsaunders7925]

Hybrid devices would be a start. A phones chips being self powered while the screen,transmitter and sound amplifier being lithium powered?

[@user-dr2pg8fk2i]

3:10 now show what the required input resources are per Kg including money and energy, along with post process requirements.

[@nholdzlacambra8980]

If you're machine working circuit with Coil or Inductor of wire, you can bring the energy consumed black to battery source, Losing 10 to 15 %. But there's another way to accommodate generating 10 to 15 %.

[@davidelliott5843]

Moltex Energy is building a reactor in Canada that’s fuelled by nuclear waste. The end result is a waste with 30 years 1/2 life vs 30,000 years for the unused waste. They also get paid to take away the “waste” and every kg will generate 25 X as much as the original PWR was able to extract. This is not BS it just demonstrates the enormous energy content of nuclear fuel.

[@FRYEGS6]

But, for what it is worth, I really appreciate having minds that have understanding on a scientific level to PROVE or DISPROVE claims made by companies and individuals that may be trying to profit off of misinformation and can not really deliver on said technical advances or industrial breakthroughs. Thank you TWO BIT Da Vinci for your excellent commentary and explanation of content. I would have taken half a life to figure all that out.

[@marlenfras5490]

Sounds terrific. Get it done. I'd buy it.

[@2blazedinfl]

imagine sensors on a bridge that could check for strain and stress. that would be great with traditional power sources. or roads that don't need repaved every decade. or cars that dont rust out in 10 years. its great that people are working on all this future tech, but right now everything is as cheap as possible and disposable

[@normanchodrick2630]

It seems to me that, while Nicola Tesla had a car early on that ran on apparently non-battery generated electricity taking electricity directly from the air (ether?) and word is that a fellow in African has a similar car, that this is the way to go. Info left out as to the speed that can be produced and whether this source is useable for trucks, aircraft or small or larger ships. Sounds like a possibly somewhat different application from the broadcast electricity that Tesla will use to power homes with free energy.

[@georgeflitzer7160]

So is this the answer to the meter problem?

[@phookadude]

The real solution for power and waste is to set up containment reactors as the center of industrial parks. A sealed vessel with heat exchanges could act as a boiler for industrial processes. For example one of the reasons alcohol fuel isn't green is because of the energy required to distill, if that energy was heat from a sealed container of nuclear waste then alcohol becomes green.

[@chrismaxny4066]

Just want to know about the 3500kwh per year figure for a household at 1:36 into the video. Is that a worldwide average? According to the EIA website in 2015 the average yearly electrical use for a single attached home in the Northeast US was 7202 kwh.

[@Scapestoat]

I can tell you that for Germany (and the Netherlands is much the same) the average for a two-person household is about 3200kwh. For a one-person household, it is about 1900kwh.

[@EricAllen8494]

Self powered chips are key

[@lancecorey6582]

40 years ago, I had a watch with a phosphorescence back-plane powered by tritium. It was fine for about 6 years until the tritium decayed and the phosphorescent back-plane didn't provide enough light to see the LCD.

[@b_uppy]

This is interesting. We could forego the need for more nuclear power as we have a huge supply of spent nuclear fuel, and because this could easily store surplus power until its needed during peak times.

[@Robert_McGarry_Poems]

Self powered chips sound pretty sweet.

[@Robert_McGarry_Poems]

We only use 5v differentials, for logic, in our circuitry now because it's fine, considering that powering a screen and other internals is what consumes most of the power, so it's no real loss. However, circuits that are purely computational don't need all that energy, so a battery that lasts hundreds of years at very low output, would still be just fine.

[@Robert_McGarry_Poems]

All it really needs is enough output to saturate the circuit and run a clock.

[@got2kittys]

A capsule of the hot stuff, shielded to be safe, could permanently heat hot water. In a floor, it could heat a home for life.

[@markkoons7488]

You run a fine channel. Thank you.

[@reclhoss]

Seems like something being researched for uses outside the public sector.

[@Mavendow]

"So, in short, my house will come filled with spying devices." "But hey, who am I to complain!" The wall: "Damn right."

[@arthurwagar88]

Very interesting. Thanks for good stuff.

[@agw5425]

What I want to know is how big would the battery need to be to actually charge a phone, can it be that a battery the size of a gallon milk jug could be kept in your house as a emergency phone charger? Then there is stationary batteries, how much power could you get out of these batteries if you have the volume of a 40" shipping container, could it power your summer cabin or your emergency prepper "bunker" ? How much power do we have to have to live with in reason? You could also have a li po "house battery" as a buffer as you do not use the same amount of power 24/7, in my home I would need less than 200w continuous(24/7) power to fill my needs if I had a house battery.

[@laina6219]

I dont know what the heck I bought 2+ yrs ago. Is a marine underwater flashlight that can endure harsh conditions. It turned on by itself back in Aug 2022 and it will not turn off. Has an issue and cannot find its make or model sold on the internet. Cannot open it to take out batteries or whatever is keeping the charge and light on... Today date Feb 21, 2023. Must be some sort of radio active material making it keep going 24/7 for so many months.

[@SeraphX2]

I hate when people change title names. Makes it hard to search for videos in history when you can vaguely remember the title as it is and then it totally changes.

[@TwoBitDaVinci]

Sorry Robert! Sometimes we have to go through a few concepts to find one that performs well

[@thegoldenpete]

I think they are only getting a small cross-section of the wave. Surely a smart cooky could design a multi-junction betavoltaic diode to capture more of the beta wave across the frequency?

[@TwoBitDaVinci]

I think you're approaching this the right way, i think it depends on the fuel source, but very very interesting idea

[@ipp_tutor]

The problem isn’t how much of the energy you can extract. Even at 100% efficiency, you won’t be able to get enough power because the speed at which elements decay is fixed and only depends on the purity of the sample. So, as Ricky’s calculations are based on 100% pure samples, and even then you can’t get enough power, there’s no way to get more out of these batteries using this type of physics.

[@MishaDaBear]

Everything that you showed was flat. It is not a solar collector, therefore it does not need to be flat! It could be a sphere or be cubic (6 sides, or 6 collectors) around the emmitting material actually shielding us from it.better yet I suspect multy layered collectors can be employeed as more collectors less actual emmissions! Thorium emits alpha, correct? In my province (near Maine) we have a REM/Iridium Mine (8" thick beds) where that product is interlain with pure thorium in bedding of 8' to 90 foot thick beds. Can we use thorium for nuclear batteries?

[@aronbraswell1589]

could you do a vid on set up and install of a small wind power grid tied system? maybe installed with solar. am very curous and in the market to do this but, in reading is confusing to me. would love your take on this

[@NdxtremePro]

Why not put these into a set of series to create a secondary power station to add to the grid? Or have them more locally at the home? We put batteries together all the time to increase voltage and storage capacity, these seem ideal to create extremely long lasting power stations, and would allow us to go fully nuclear since we would have a place to use the waste.

[@kennystrawnmusic]

The fact that a beta particle IS an electron should be noted here. Imagine using a tritium fuel cell instead of a chemical hydrogen fuel cell to power a Mirai - no need to refuel ever again in that case.

[@UrbanBard1]

The problem is the kind of nuclear reactors we have been using: Light Water Reactors. Their waste products are not useful and have long half lives. A Thorium based molten salt reactor's waste is immediately salable while producing electrical power more safely. The amount of waste in a MSR is tiny. A one gigawatt nuclear reactor would convert one ton of Thorium into a ton of waste in a year. After 10 years in storage, 83% of that waste has decayed into stable elements. The 17%which remains radioactive is 340 pounds. 75 pounds of that would be Plutonium 238 with a similar amount of Strontium 90. There are other elements which might be useful to separate, , but their amounts are comparatively small. What remains of the radioactive mass is mostly Cesium which we have no use for, so we would need to bury that. The longest half life elements in the waste becomes stable in about 300 years, not a 100 thousand years.

[@AaronSchwarz42]

The waste is also highly compact & can be turned into new fuels for breeder reactors of 4th generation reactors

[@AaronSchwarz42]

The metals in the spent fuel rods are more valuable than gold & platinum, including iridium in the rod tube wall, many times more valuable than most common precious metals!

[@Shadobanned4life]

Thanks for a very interesting video! Bravo!🌞

[@TwoBitDaVinci]

🙏

[@custodioruperto3797]

Do they have enough energy to power a micro câmera it could be used to security camera in house business ECT it could be a great application for this

[@andreverville9492]

What about the Mr Fusion appliance in the rear of the De Lorean car?