Talk:Plutonium-238/Archive 1

Infobox
Typing error in the headline of the box at the bottom: It is Pu-238 and not Pu-237 Fmwagner (talk) 13:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Those boxes are meant to be used as they were before your edit - the top row is separate from the bottom row, and the reactions in the bottom row involve Pu-238, not the neighboring plutonium isotopes. It's a really bad, confusing design, but that's how it was intended. Its talk page Template_talk:Isotope has more detailed criticism. --JWB (talk) 17:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

RTG Source
The article 'Advanced Test Reactor' states that it is a source of Pu-238; this article states that all of the Pu-238 in US space probes is obtained from Russia. Are these statements contradictory? LorenzoB (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Errors
The "Health Risks and Assertions of Safety" was completely bogus, unfounded and unsited. FourtySix&amp;Two (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

There is an error in this article

To highlight this, I put the following note in this article:

''There is an error in the paragraph above. Heat, not neutrons, is used in radioisotope thermoelectric generators. Whether Pu-238 is used in neutron sources, I don't know. Someone please tidy this up.''

This was immediately reverted by Kilo-Lima who was also very rude about it:

''Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 16:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)''

Now let us get our facts straight:

Thermoelectric generators use heat, hence the prefix thermo as in thermometer. The use of Pu-238 comes from its decay heat of over 500W/kg. Alpha emitters can be used in neutron sources if coupled with something that gives off neutrons when struck by alpha particles, such as beryllium, but this is not what happens in thermoelectic generators. Pu-238 will also give off a small quantity of neutrons due to spontaneous fission, but the number cannot be great because I happen to know it is used with very little shielding.

It is not vandalism to point out an error in an article and ask for a tidy up. Kilo-Lima has reverted the article to a state where it gives incorrect information without warning. So just who is posting nonsense? 81.154.181.130 17:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Well it was put into the article informally and I think it would have been far more easier to correct this information, rather than add in out-of-content text to the article. That's the greatness of Wikipedia! If it's wrong, change it!  K ilo-Lima|(talk) 17:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The snag is that I don't know enough to correct the article usefully, only enough to be certain that there is an error and I think that the warning I put in was better than no warning at all. By the way, how does one put up a formal warning tag for inaccuracy? 81.154.181.130 18:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

There is at least one other error in the first paragraph:

Np-239 decays to form Pu-239 not Pu-238

I think it is unlikely that Pu-238 was the first Pu isotope to be made; it was more likely Pu-239. 86.129.163.163 09:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)...Cancel that, it looks like it was!--81.154.180.66 12:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * To put up a warning tag, add at the top of the page or  at  the end of the sentence. Polonium 20:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

2017 energy problems resolved
The 7th link reference no longer seems valid. It goes to a sandbox wordpress site. Should we replace it with http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/space/stories/plutonium-238-spacecraft-fuel-shortage-may-have-been-averted ?
 * --Ben_Dad (talk) 14 June 2012 —Preceding undated comment added 03:37, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Another source that could be used to expand the article

 * http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/09/plutonium-238-problem/

-- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:20, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Is this pdf useful as source?
I found this pdf, would it be useful as source or for the external links? Χρυσάνθη Λυκούση (talk) 05:25, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

USA Supply and production
I found this extensive report on the current production effort for NASA. I hope it is used soon to update that section in the WP article. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/within-nasa-a-plutonium-power-struggle/ Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 03:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Dwayne Day (Blackstar) is pretty critical of the article.--Craigboy (talk) 07:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

NASA Running Out of Plutonium
This site: [] tells that NASA Running Out of Plutonium.Agre22 (talk) 21:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)agre22


 * Congress authorizes the NASA Administrator and the Secretary of Energy to "pursue a joint approach beginning in fiscal year 2011 towards restarting and sustaining the domestic production of radioisotope thermoelectric generator material for deep space and other science and exploration missions. Funds authorized by this Act for NASA shall be made available under a reimbursable agreement with the Department of Energy for the purpose of reestablishing facilities to produce fuel required for radioisotope thermoelectric generators to enable future missions."
 * NASA Authorization Act of 2010 - SEC. 806.
 * --Craigboy (talk) 20:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Relevant info "Plutonium-238 does not occur in nature. Unlike 239Pu, it is unsuitable for use in nuclear weapons."

"In the past, the United States had an adequate supply of 238Pu, which was produced in facilities that existed to support the U.S. nuclear weapons program. The problem is that no 238Pu has been produced in the United States since the Department of Energy (DOE) shut down those facilities in the late 1980s."

"However, Russian facilities to produce 238Pu were also shut down many years ago, and the DOE will soon take delivery of its last shipment of 238Pu from Russia. The committee does not believe that there is any additional 238Pu (or any operational 238Pu production facilities) available anywhere in the world."

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/636900main_Howe_Presentation.pdf

--Craigboy (talk) 22:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Another good link. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/leag/documents/12653.pdf --Craigboy (talk) 11:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

NASA's Radioisotope Power Systems - Plans (July 27 2015)

DOE update on Pu238 restart and pellet production (August 25 2015)

--Craigboy (talk) 07:31, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Plutonium-238. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110928034832/http://nuclear.inl.gov/spacenuclear/docs/final72005faqs.pdf to http://nuclear.inl.gov/spacenuclear/docs/final72005faqs.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120203033230/http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/factSheets/2012_Pu-238_Factsheet_final.pdf to http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/factSheets/2012_Pu-238_Factsheet_final.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

First Isotope
I'm confused, how is 238Pu the first isotope of plutonium to be synthesized? 239Np was synthesized earlier, and it decays to 239Pu, so surely 239Pu would've been the first isotope synthesized? XinaNicole (talk) 02:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It was the first isotope that was detected and conclusively proved to be from a new element. Double sharp (talk) 13:27, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

239
Too much of the article discusses Pu239, presumably well described in its own article. Gah4 (talk) 11:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

weapons
The weapons section suggests that there was work for a Pu238 weapon, but doesn't explain what it might have been. Gah4 (talk) 11:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

production, extraction methods
234U could be removed from 238Pu to meet NASA specifications for power delivery. See PUREX(Plutonium and Uranium Recovery by EXtraction) method referenced under Nuclear Reprocessing and PUREX Interstitial Energy (talk) 18:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)