Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Atomic Automobile
DAMN INTERESTING ^ | 27 AUGUST 2006 | ALAN BELLOWS

Posted on 05/17/2008 6:10:24 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist

During the 1950s, much of the world was quivering with anticipation over the exciting prospects of nuclear power. Atomic energy promised to churn out clean, safe electricity that would be "too cheap to meter." It seemed that there was no energy problem too large or too small for the mighty atom to tackle during the glorious and modern Atomic Age.

It was during this honeymoon with nuclear energy– in 1957– that the Ford Motor Company unveiled the most ambitious project in their history: a concept vehicle which had a sleek futuristic look, emitted no harmful vapors, and offered incredible fuel mileage far beyond that of the most efficient cars ever built. This automobile-of-the-future was called the Ford Nucleon, named for its highly unique design feature… a pint-size atomic fission reactor in the trunk.

Ford's engineers imagined a world in which full-service recharging stations would one day supplant petroleum fuel stations, where depleted reactors could be swapped out for fresh ones lickety-split. The car's reactor setup was essentially the same as a nuclear submarine's, but miniaturized for automobile use. It was designed to use uranium fission to heat a steam generator, rapidly converting stored water into high-pressure steam which could then be used to drive a set of turbines. One steam turbine would provide the torque to propel the car while another would drive an electrical generator. Steam would then be condensed back into water in a cooling loop, and sent back to the steam generator to be reused. Such a closed system would allow the reactor to produce power as long as fissile material remained.

Using this system, designers anticipated that a typical Nucleon would travel about 5,000 miles per charge. Because the powerplant was an interchangeable component, owners would have the freedom to select a reactor configuration based on their personal needs, ranging anywhere from a souped-up uranium guzzler to a low-torque, high-mileage version. William Ford alongside a 3/8 scale Nucleon modelWilliam Ford alongside a 3/8 scale Nucleon modelAnd without the noisy internal combustion and exhaust of conventional cars, the Nucleon would be relatively quiet, emitting little more than a turbine whine.

The vehicle's aerodynamic styling, one-piece windshield, and dual tail fins (which are absent in some photographs) are reminiscent of spacecraft from 1950s-era science fiction, but some aspects of the Nucleon's unique design were more utilitarian. For instance, its passenger area was situated quite close to the front of the chassis, extending beyond the front axle. This arrangement was meant to distance the passengers from the atomic pile in the rear, and to provide maximum axle support to the heavy equipment and its attendant shielding. Another practical design aspect was the addition of air intakes at the leading edge of the roof and at the base of the roof supports, apparently to be used as part of the reactor's cooling system.

Ford's nuclear automobile embodied the naive optimism of the era. Most people were ignorant of the dangers of the atomic contraption, as well as the risk that every minor fender-bender had the potential to become a radioactive disaster. In fact, the Nucleon concept was often received with great enthusiasm. Some sources even claim that the US government sponsored Ford's atomic car research program.

The Nucleon's silent, sleek, and efficient design was poised to secure its place in the American lifestyle of the future. It seemed inevitable that the internal combustion engine would fade into obscurity, becoming a quaint relic of a pre-atomic past. But the Nucleon's design hinged on the assumption that smaller nuclear reactors would soon be developed, as well as lighter shielding materials. When those innovations failed to appear, the project was scrapped due to conspicuous impracticality; the bulky apparatus and heavy lead shielding didn't allow for a safe and efficient car-sized package. Moreover, as the general public became increasingly aware of the dangers of atomic energy and the problem of nuclear waste, the thought of radioactive atomobiles zipping around town lost much of its appeal. Atoms had broken their promise; the honeymoon was over.

The Ford Nucleon sans tail finsThe Ford Nucleon sans tail finsFord never produced a working prototype, nevertheless the Nucleon remains an icon of the Atomic Age. In spite of the Nucleon's flaws, its designers deserve a nod for their slapdash ingenuity. Their reckless optimism demonstrates that one shouldn't consider a task impossible just because nobody has tried it yet– some ideas need to be debunked on their own merit. With today's looming energy crisis and slow migration to alternative fuel sources, we may not have seen the last of the atomic automobile concept. A safe atomic vehicle may not be entirely beyond our reach, as the US Navy has demonstrated with its perfect record of nuclear safety. Perhaps one day fossil fuels will wither under the radioactive glare of the mighty atom, and our highways will hum with the steam turbines of mobile Chernobyls. It could be a real blast.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Science
KEYWORDS: autoshop; energy; ford; liberalnightmare; nucleaon; transportation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last
To: Red Badger

Who needs gas or diesel?

ping for your entertainment


21 posted on 05/18/2008 9:44:09 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redbob

This may be a stupid idea but what about using liquid nitrogen to cool the steam? Instead of stopping at a gas station to refuel they could stop and recharge the liquid nitrogen tanks.


22 posted on 05/18/2008 10:59:07 AM PDT by Swiss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

Well, obviously! I was talking about the external appearance.


23 posted on 05/18/2008 11:55:23 AM PDT by Erasmus (Nihilism never amounted to anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Hey man, at least they were considering something different than gas.

I still can't figure out why they haven't come up with anything else besides gas since that time?

24 posted on 05/18/2008 3:29:05 PM PDT by Hillarys nightmare (So Proud to be living in "Jesus Land" ! Don't you wish everyone did?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chickensoup
"I want an nuclear car too. An electric one I can plug into my local Nuclear power plant."

Too Cool!

You could drive in the day and let it generate power to sell to the grid at night.

25 posted on 05/18/2008 5:09:11 PM PDT by HangThemHigh (Entropy's not what it used to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Swiss

Nitrogen has a very low heat of vaporization, so it doesn’t take much heat energy at all to vaporize it. It’s low temperature of condensation is no special help for this engineering problem. If you wanted to use a bulk object at a low temperature as a heat sink, you could choose steel or stone, for example, and just cool it to liquid nitrogen temperature, and it would perform much better for this purpose, but still not very well at all.


26 posted on 05/18/2008 6:44:31 PM PDT by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; thackney

Actually an “atomic” automobile could be made with existing technology. Using a small PEBBLE BED REACTOR to generate the electricity to drive the electric motor. It would not be practical except for large vehicles like tractor-trailers and delivery vehicles. One problem though, you cannot shut the reactor “off”................


27 posted on 05/19/2008 5:36:41 AM PDT by Red Badger ( We don't have science, but we do have consensus.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rawhide
How do you get into one of these? I do not see any doors.

You teleport in.

Duh.

28 posted on 08/14/2008 7:11:23 AM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
One problem though, you cannot shut the reactor “off”................

Just plug it into your house at night.

29 posted on 08/14/2008 7:39:29 AM PDT by stevio (Crunchy Con - God, guns, guts, and organically grown crunchy nuts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: stevio

Yes. But there would already be one at your house running your house. They would have to make some sort of allowances to add these to the main grid while parked at the house or work or malls..................


30 posted on 08/14/2008 7:43:27 AM PDT by Red Badger (All that carbon in all that oil and coal was once in the atmosphere. We're just putting it back.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Good point.


31 posted on 08/14/2008 7:46:01 AM PDT by stevio (Crunchy Con - God, guns, guts, and organically grown crunchy nuts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Redbob

Funny you should mention Lear. I read his biography and when he was marketing his steam idea, he said he had a magic fluid which turned out to be water. The guy was a genius and a little loopy.


32 posted on 08/14/2008 8:14:47 AM PDT by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson