Solar Lets You Visit. Nuclear Lets You Stay. A delicate conversation.

Guest: Dr. Bhavya Lal – Former NASA Chief Technologist, MIT-trained nuclear engineer, and architect of U.S. space nuclear policy.

The Cosmic Scoop:
Nuclear power’s bad Earthly reputation hides its potential as a lifeline beyond our planet. Space is already radioactive—and if we want to stay and build on the Moon, Mars, or Europa, nuclear offers “power abundance” solar can’t match. Dr. Lal explains why, covering tech, safety, law, history, and why the next space era may finally embrace it.

Quotable Insights:

• “Solar lets you visit. Nuclear lets you stay and build.”
• “Without nuclear, we design for scarcity. With nuclear, we design for capability.”
• “Adding nuclear in space is like pouring water in a hurricane—it barely registers.”
• “We are entering an era of abundance.”

Cosmic Timeline:
[00:00:00] Nuclear perception problem
[00:04:00] NASA’s lunar reactor plan
[00:06:40] Moon nights & Mars dust storms
[00:08:10] Power abundance
[00:11:20] Why it hasn’t happened yet
[00:16:50] Nuclear tech & propulsion
[00:21:30] Voyager’s RTGs
[00:23:00] Solar limits
[00:25:00] Soviet space reactors
[00:28:00] Current development
[00:32:00] Space vs. Earth reactors
[00:36:00] Legal frameworks
[00:38:00] Launch safety
[00:42:00] Reputation & safety evolution
[00:46:00] Why nuclear is inevitable
[00:48:30] Europa’s ice drills
[00:50:40] The Great Filter
[00:56:00] Project Orion
[01:00:00] Music: ABBA – “Dancing Queen”
[01:01:00] Inspiration: “Think of abundance”

Links to Explore:

• NASA Fission Surface Power Project 
• Space Policy Directive-6 (U.S.)
• Outer Space Treaty (1967)
• The Europa Report (film)

Spread the Cosmic Love!
If this conversation shifted your perspective on nuclear—or challenged what you thought you knew—share it with a friend, colleague, or fellow stargazer. Let’s talk about the technologies that will power our next giant leap.

You can find us on Spotify and Apple Podcast!

Please visit us at SpaceWatch.Global, subscribe to our newsletters. Follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter!

Transcript

SCP_138_Bhavya Lal Master

[00:00:00] Bhavya: bong. So we started nuclear by killing people,

[00:00:04] Markus: Hmm. 

[00:00:05] Bhavya: I think we just, we just never got over that. 

[00:00:08] Markus: [00:00:10] Hello everyone. This is the Space Cafe Podcast, and I'm Markus.

[00:00:18] Markus: So nuclear is [00:00:20] bad, right? I think we can agree. Oh, I don't. I don't know about you, but this is at least the way I was brought up. Nuclear energy is a tricky way [00:00:30] to produce energy. Now, my child of the seventies, and this is the way I was brought up, but. There's a little twist. Um, the decades [00:00:40] have evolved and we as a humanity.

[00:00:43] Markus: This is why we do this podcast are branching out into new territory that is space [00:00:50] and space is not earth. And as we know, space wants to kill us all the time. And one of the main reasons it's pretty dangerous out there [00:01:00] is the radiation. So one could argue that space and nuclear are pretty much accustomed to one another.

[00:01:08] Markus: Because it's a radioactive a, [00:01:10] a radiating place. So in addition to some people who argue that if we want to set up shop for good in [00:01:20] space, we can't do with solar energy. Solar energy is for visitors. They say, and if you wanna stay for good, uh, you need something else [00:01:30] and this, this, something else could be nuclear energy.

[00:01:33] Markus: This is the argument. Or the discussion. And so I'm not taking sides. I'm just [00:01:40] here to ask questions, um, on your behalf. On my behalf, because, well, how are we gonna do it? What is our energy source out there? And so, um. [00:01:50] I'm super happy to present to you one of the most prominent, um, people in the field Dr.

[00:01:57] Markus: Baja Lao is a former [00:02:00] chief technologist at NASA and MIT trained nuclear engineer and one of the architects of US [00:02:10] space nuclear policy. She worked at the highest levels of government to shape how we power our future beyond Earth [00:02:20] so this is going to be fascinating because while I'm trying to find out if this re shifts my attitude toward nuclear, and we'll find out [00:02:30] before we do so, um, if you have anything you wanna communicate, um, in my direction, wanna tell me criticism, I'm highly.

[00:02:38] Markus: Interested in hearing your [00:02:40] criticism, but also, um, your love letters and whatnot, please send them to podcast at Space Watch Global. And now my friends. Without further ado, please welcome [00:02:50] Dr. Baja LA to the Space Cafe Podcast. Let's go. I.

[00:02:54] Markus: Good. Whenever you're ready. 

[00:02:56] Markus: Pavia, 

[00:02:57] Bhavya: Okay. I'm just kidding. My glasses, I [00:03:00] can't see. Okay. See, I thought that was the other thing. I thought this was, uh, audio. So I normally have my nuclear earrings on and I don't, so sorry about that. I have this very [00:03:10] cool nuclear earrings.

[00:03:11] Markus: you got Nucle. So this is a, a fantastic conversation starter. What are nuclear earrings? 

[00:03:17] Bhavya: I have this [00:03:20] amazing deep red set of earrings that is an atom, a model of an atom, the rather for atom model, you know, not the quantum model.

[00:03:29] Markus: mm-hmm. 

[00:03:29] Bhavya: the 

[00:03:29] Bhavya: number [00:03:30] of electrons, it is a lithium model. I don't know why lithium, we need urine 2 35 or we need plutonium 2 38, but I guess that's too many, too many electrons to show on a laser cut [00:03:40] piece of wood.

[00:03:41] Markus: they are safe to wear. They're not radiating.

[00:03:45] Bhavya: They are made of wood.

[00:03:47] Markus: Baja, um, we just [00:03:50] heard a couple of days ago that, um, NASA considers to build a nuclear reactor on the moon. Good thing or a bad thing?[00:04:00]

[00:04:00] Bhavya: Oh, I think Markus, it's an excellent thing. again, moon is just the start. The real price is a scalable power [00:04:10] backbone for the entire solar system. But, but let's start with the

[00:04:14] Markus: Mm-hmm. 

[00:04:14] Bhavya: starting. The first thing to remind folks is that this isn't a new thing back in 2020. [00:04:20] Space policy directive six in the United States actually told NASA to build and launch a reactor, uh, to land on the [00:04:30] moon by 2027. That is. And then of course, that that was, that was a policy directive. It never came with any money. So, you know, clearly NASA spent a little bit [00:04:40] drips and drops of money, but obviously not enough. They made some progress, but obviously not enough. So, um, the other really interesting thing happened, and these are important things to [00:04:50] know, is in November of 2024, a few months ago, NASA actually put a stake in the ground.

[00:04:55] Bhavya: It said needs to have a nuclear reactor on [00:05:00] Mars. And again, it didn't have a date and it didn't have a, uh, uh, you know, a power level. But it did say that there is need for a power reactor on Mars. So, and [00:05:10] obviously a lot of what NASA is doing on the moon is preparing for Mars, right? I mean, moon is a proving ground, so it makes sense to have a reactor, you know, tested, et cetera, on the [00:05:20] moon.

[00:05:20] Bhavya: So when we go to Mars, we are ready. So those are two important things to remind people that this, this didn't come out. I mean, for those of us who follow space, this didn't come out of the blue. It's, it's a, it's a series [00:05:30] of things that have, uh, gone on. to your question, why is it a good, good idea?

[00:05:34] Bhavya: I mean, so, you know, night lasts 14 earth days on the moon and [00:05:40] in, and you know, in those times, and inside the polar craters, where we expect to mine ice, the sun never rises. Temperature plunges to minus [00:05:50] 243 degrees Celsius. That's as close to absolute zero as you can kind of imagine. Um, you know, you can try solar and batteries, but you'd need football sized [00:06:00] arrays and shipping container sized batteries, right?

[00:06:02] Bhavya: I mean, remember the, uh, the International Space Station generates about a hundred kilowatts and it is the size of, uh, you know, an [00:06:10] American football field. And then of course, as I said, moon is just one place. The next place would be Mars. And Mars gets even less sun than the moon. Uh, Mars [00:06:20] has dust storms, which can block sunlight for weeks.

[00:06:22] Bhavya: I mean, if you remember, the Opportunity Rover, um, basically died

[00:06:28] Markus: Yeah. 

[00:06:29] Markus: Yeah. 

[00:06:29] Bhavya: [00:06:30] ran out. And what nuclear does, it changes the equation. It gives you continuous high output electricity anywhere lunar [00:06:40] craters, Mars, and dust season. And again, it doesn't limit it to lunar Mars.

[00:06:44] Bhavya: Jupiter's icy moons, Europa, I mean, Europa has thick, thick, thick ice crusts, and we need to drill [00:06:50] down to find. Well, I hope life. Um, so we cannot do any of that, without nuclear. I mean, one of the things, so, so we just recently wrote a report on [00:07:00] this. I hope you have a chance to connect, uh, to, to connect your users, your, your, your listeners, um, an audience with it.

[00:07:06] Bhavya: But, you know, we talk about solar, lets you visit [00:07:10] nuclear, lets you, lets you stay and build.

[00:07:13] Markus: Mm. 

[00:07:14] Bhavya: just about the moon, it's about unlocking Mars. It's about unlocking the outer planets and the rest of the solar [00:07:20] system and beyond.

[00:07:23] Markus: Can you refresh my memory? Met Damon, um, on Mars. Um, did he [00:07:30] rely on nuclear or was it solo powered? 

[00:07:33] Markus: The movie The Martian, 

[00:07:34] Bhavya: did. He had an RTGA radioisotope, thermoelectric

[00:07:38] Markus: right? Right. Mm-hmm. 

[00:07:39] Bhavya: put [00:07:40] in a wrap in a blanket. Um, and he used it to, to heat himself when he was in his little rover.

[00:07:47] Markus: Te tell me about what is the big deal [00:07:50] about nuclear in space? Because it seems like in, in public understanding nuclear is bad and this is why we do not do it in [00:08:00] space. So what is, what is the big deal about it?

[00:08:04] Bhavya: So I think the, the, let me just talk about the, the vision here. [00:08:10] Power is the currency of doing anything you do.

[00:08:14] Bhavya: So, I 

[00:08:15] Markus: Hmm. 

[00:08:15] Bhavya: I think 

[00:08:15] Bhavya: maybe one way to think about it is, you know, on earth we had candlelight, you know, for, for [00:08:20] millennia. And then one day, maybe the 19th, 20th centuries we got electricity and we got the electric, electric grid. In a way, it is the [00:08:30] same kind of big deal in space as it is on earth to have what I call power abundance. So it used to be that we would design for [00:08:40] constrained power. So the Voyager missions had about. You know, 470 watts of power that's like, you know, a blow dryer for,

[00:08:48] Bhavya: for 

[00:08:49] Markus: Hmm. 

[00:08:49] Bhavya: of 

[00:08:49] Bhavya: us, [00:08:50] uh, the, Horizons, the mission that went to Pluto had about 200 watts. These are minuscule amounts of power. You can [00:09:00] barely get anything done. In fact, to, to get the, uh, data back from, uh, new Horizons, uh, took 16 months because we just couldn't [00:09:10] have those data rates. mean, more importantly, I mean, it was a $700 million mission and it, it took nine years to get to Pluto [00:09:20] and it couldn't even go in orbit around Pluto.

[00:09:22] Bhavya: Right. It was like, it whi

[00:09:24] Bhavya: Pluto. It was almost like we put a camera on a bullet and sent it off. So I think [00:09:30] that is the, that is the problem. Without nuclear, we just do not have, we, we have power scarcity and, and having nuclear puts us in the world. Power [00:09:40] abundance. So now we no longer designed to our power availability.

[00:09:44] Bhavya: We designed to our needs, we designed to capabilities. And I think that is the core reason we need to have nuclear. [00:09:50] And to your point about, you know, nuclear bad? I mean the, the space environment. And you observe that yourself, uh, has, um, uh, infallible bonds of [00:10:00] radiation, galactic cosmic radiation, solar radiation, and it, you know, it's almost saying putting more radiation, first of all, [00:10:10] something goes wrong and you know, we can return to that, you are not really even putting more radiation.

[00:10:14] Bhavya: But let's assume that something does go wrong. It's almost like you're standing in a hurricane and you [00:10:20] pour a bottle of water on yourself. Like, do you really get weather? There's just so much radiation and space already that adding this little bit of radiation doesn't mean [00:10:30] anything. And in any case, these systems are so carefully designed that there is no. there is no, um, you know, danger or minimal danger of radiation or [00:10:40] leaks.

[00:10:42] Markus: Humans in space have been around now for a couple of decades, and still we have no nuclear [00:10:50] powered or nuclear power plants in space. The ISS is not nuclear powered, so we do, as you mentioned, we do have a bunch of, um, batteries, nuclear [00:11:00] batteries, but no serious fusion reactors, um, or so the, the efficient reactors that is.

[00:11:07] Markus: Um, so the, the question is, what [00:11:10] is the problem here? Is, is this an ideological problem or is it a security problem?

[00:11:17] Bhavya: Yeah. So first of all, just a [00:11:20] reminder that we did put a reactor in space in 1965. So, you know, the United States has flown a reactor, uh, and. The Soviet Union has [00:11:30] had more than 30 nuclear reactors in space. So, so it is already, um, something that we have done for many, many decades. And I understand, [00:11:40] you know, China is working on nuclear reactors for space as well, but to your question as to what is the problem here?

[00:11:48] Bhavya: So, yeah, so I mean, I think the, they [00:11:50] are, we've had some challenges and the challenges aren't really technological. There's no physics problem here, right. The, the, the challenges are, you know, we [00:12:00] have, we've never really had a mission pull up until, you know, up until NASA put it, taken the ground and said, we need nuclear power from Mars. So we didn't really need it. So we would develop, we would start, [00:12:10] we would stop, and then nothing would happen. Another challenge we had was, so, so again, in the, in 2000 we started a program at NASA called Jim Prometheus, which was a 200 [00:12:20] kilowatt electric, a nuclear electric propulsion, uh, emission to the moons of Jupiter. was an overreach. So we didn't really know how to build even little [00:12:30] things, and we decided to build a huge thing. And of course, before we knew it, it was too expensive and it was canceled. another challenge we've had is, um, [00:12:40] um, there's no sort of central, there's no, um, there's no leadership. We do not, um, we do not have a place in the, in the [00:12:50] government, which is a keeper of, of technology. Um, so, so, you know, again, in the United States there is, you know, we have a nuclear navy and which is not the [00:13:00] safest navys in the world. We've never had a single reactor, uh, single accident. and, and, um, there's an Office of Naval Reactors, which is part of the Department [00:13:10] of Energy in the United States, and they make sure that we are always, you know, at the technological cutting edge, as safe as can be, et cetera.

[00:13:17] Bhavya: There's no such thing for space nuclear [00:13:20] systems. And last but not least, I would say, um, there's a disconnect between timelines of development and decision timelines. So typically, you know, [00:13:30] in the United States, again, um, a lot of what I say is kind of with the US perspective. Um, you know, administrations are four to eight years, so all decisions are made in these, you know, four year [00:13:40] timeline or in the Department of Defense.

[00:13:41] Bhavya: These, you know, they have these, um, you know, decision timelines that are about five years, but nuclear development timelines are 10 to 20 years. [00:13:50] So, so these decision makers come, they are looking at their four year window or their five year window, and nuclear is 10 years. And they're like, okay, moving on.

[00:13:58] Bhavya: have just 

[00:13:59] Bhavya: not taken 

[00:13:59] Bhavya: [00:14:00] nuclear seriously now because it has never been ready. So those are sort of the four reasons why we haven't had nuclear systems. And of course, uh, what we did in our, in our [00:14:10] report, which, which just came out a few weeks ago, we kind of tried to find a way to break out of this cycle of starts and stops and failures.

[00:14:17] Markus: will the next, space station once [00:14:20] ISS gets decommissioned, be nuclear powered.

[00:14:24] Bhavya: So I think this is a great question, and nuclear has a niche. You want to [00:14:30] typically use nuclear when there isn't, where there's no sun, or when you need power density levels that cannot be provided by solar you are in a [00:14:40] radiation environment such as, you know, the, the, the rings around Jupiter, where it is just too abrasive, too harsh, too corrosive earth orbit.

[00:14:48] Bhavya: If there's plenty of [00:14:50] sun, why would you use nuclear? Right? You should be using solar in places where you can use batteries. You should be using batteries. And you use nuclear when you need [00:15:00] nuclear, uh, when

[00:15:01] Markus: Is it I guess it's a lot more expensive because I mean like, why should I use solar? If I could use nuclear, is it [00:15:10] because of the price tag attached to it or something, something else?

[00:15:15] Bhavya: I think in the near term it is a price tag. We haven't developed nuclear systems, but at some point [00:15:20] when we will have it and, and the costs are comparable, I think, and, you know, we can make sure that, you know, the safety levels are comparable as well. We, I mean, I think it would [00:15:30] be, um, neutral, but for the moment, nuclear is more expensive. Uh, so, uh, we just use it where we need it.

[00:15:39] Markus: Let's just, [00:15:40] um, a, a laid a ground for, uh, an understanding for me and, and for the listeners what kind of nuclear technologies we [00:15:50] are even considering. So what forms can nuclear, or in what form can nuclear play a role in space? So I'm talking about [00:16:00] propulsion, I'm talking about, um, a source of energy, but there is different, uh, uh, is a variety of energy sources.

[00:16:07] Markus: So could you lay the ground for [00:16:10] us for all of 

[00:16:10] Markus: this? 

[00:16:11] Bhavya: Yes. So, takes many forms. Um, one of the forms is radioisotope, thermoelectric generators [00:16:20] or radioisotope heating units. These are essentially pellets of, it could be plutonium 2 38. It could also be other radioisotopes that decay. [00:16:30] And the idea is that, you know, this is natural decay of radio reactivity o of an element.

[00:16:36] Bhavya: And uh, you just harness that, um, that [00:16:40] energy. It could be alpha particles, beta particles or, or gamma particle or the, mostly it's alpha particles and you can use, you can convert that into electricity. So those are [00:16:50] rtgs. We've had them for, you know, 60 or more years. We had RTGS on all the Apollo missions.

[00:16:56] Bhavya: We have had RTGS on Voyager, uh, [00:17:00] perseverance rover, the upcoming emission from nasa. Uh, uh, uh, I think Dragonfly going to Titan will have an RTG. So it's something, it's, it's tried, [00:17:10] tested. True. We know how they work. They're expensive, but we know, you know, but we've had them for a long time. That's one. So, well actually those are two, right?

[00:17:17] Bhavya: Heating and electricity. The second [00:17:20] one is nuclear, um, power, uh, nuclear power in space is almost identical to nuclear power on earth. We, you know, FIS in uranium 2 35. [00:17:30] Produce heat, and that heat can be transported through a pollen coolant. It could be an earth that is typically water, but it can also be other things in space.

[00:17:38] Bhavya: We typically talk about things [00:17:40] like, you know, sodium, and potassium. Uh, also, you know, uh, gas, uh, and, and you convert that into electricity, so pretty similar. [00:17:50] Uh, so those are the power options. Then we move into propulsion where basically you have the same reactor, uh, and, and nuclear electric propulsion and EP [00:18:00] is basically, you bolt on thrusters at the end of this nuclear power plant that we just talked about. And, um, and you, and you know, you can go [00:18:10] anywhere in the solar system. Uh, NEP systems tend to have low thrust, um, uh, but they have, they have, um, they have what's called very high, uh, specific [00:18:20] impulse. So, um, one could say, um, very high gas mileage. So, you know, if you're thinking in terms of, you know, a Prius versus a Porsche. [00:18:30] Prius can go a long distance with a small amount of propellant. So that's NEP. So Porsche is nuclear electric pro nuclear thermal propulsion, which is basically pretty similar to a [00:18:40] chemical engine. Uh, in a chemical, uh, uh, um, uh, um, rocket. You have, um, uh, uh, hydrogen and oxygen. Oxygen, for [00:18:50] example, coming together in a combustion chamber. Uh, and it goes out the no nozzle at very high speed, and it produces thrust a nuclear and NTP you're basically [00:19:00] separating out the, the heat, heat source and the propellant. So, so, so then you can run a propellant over the heat source, which is a nuclear reactor, and the propellant can go at [00:19:10] very high speeds at the back of the rocket. And there you get, um, you know, you get the thrust and of course, because, um, now you can choose any propellant you like. And, [00:19:20] uh, and the specific. Impulse is directly proportional to the, uh, molecular weight or inversely proportional. So the high, so then you use hydrogen because that is a lowest molecular weight [00:19:30] gas, you know, so, so that's an exciting advantage of NTP and NTP gives you, um, both high thrust, he and high specific impulse, although not as high as, [00:19:40] an ep.

[00:19:41] Bhavya: So that's why I use the Porsche versus Prius analogy because, you know, Porsche takes a lot of gas. Um, but you know, it can, [00:19:50] you know, it goes, you know, zero to 16, three seconds or whatever. I don't know the number. Sorry, I'm not a car aficionado. so those are, and then of course now you can, uh, there's things called bimodal [00:20:00] systems, which combine an EP and NTP in the same system, and I'm sure there's other exciting alternatives as well. You know, some people have talked about, instead of having a solid core of [00:20:10] uranium on that fissions, you can have, it's so hard that it's, you know, liquid and gaseous. So, so then you can start to get into really, you know, 5,000 years out and we can talk [00:20:20] about that another time.

[00:20:21] Markus: Would um, just because you mentioned the Voyager probes, would they still be active as they are [00:20:30] currently if they weren't powered with nuclear batteries over that vast distance of time? Is there any other form [00:20:40] they could be powered with?

[00:20:43] Bhavya: I mean, nothing that we have, I mean, in principle, you can power it with, uh, no matter anti-matter drives and you [00:20:50] know, we all watch Star Trek and there's warp drive and So there's a lot of imaginary things, but in, in reality, um, you know, yeah, I mean, [00:21:00] fission is the only thing that we have. and as you go deeper into the solar system, there is no solar flux. So not only could we not, and again, it also [00:21:10] gets colder because as you farther get farther away from the sun, you are, you're, you're, you have, it's colder and colder and the, and the electronics will stop working. So both from the point of, of collecting the [00:21:20] data, right, you need to power the instruments, which we won't be able to do without, uh, rtgs.

[00:21:25] Bhavya: But also we want to send the data back. even if the, you know, the Voyager [00:21:30] missions kept on going in the solar system, and even if they maybe collect some information, uh, although it's highly unlikely, they're not gonna be able to send it back. [00:21:40] So, so yes, and again, these RTGS are, you know, they have a limited life.

[00:21:45] Bhavya: I mean, they are decaying, right? So at some point the radioactivity levels would be so low that they [00:21:50] cannot generate any more heat, and then we will stop. And so then, then Voyager is dead. But, uh, for, for now, you know, it's, I think it's well over 20 billion kilometers away. [00:22:00] Um, it is outside the solar system and, you know, it was only made possible because there was an RTG on board,

[00:22:07] Markus: Speaking of solar, [00:22:10] um, I am imagining that solar has its limits, um, the further away from a star you're traveling. So I [00:22:20] guess, um, solar is, um, makes sense if you are in the vicinity, like, like earth to, to the sun. But the further you go away [00:22:30] is, is there a place where you, you would say. It doesn't make sense and I, I guess it's most of the places in the universe because they are, most of the places in the [00:22:40] universe are too far from, from, from, uh, stars That solo makes any sense.

[00:22:47] Bhavya: right? So, I mean, solar flux reduces, you know, one [00:22:50] over R squared. So, you know, there's obviously enough on earth. I think we get, um, you know, maybe one kilowatt per square meter. Um, if somebody should check the [00:23:00] numbers at Mars, it's, you know, it's reduced by the, by a factor of 1 0 1 0.5 squared because you know it's 1.5 times farther away, or it's one point, it's [00:23:10] one over 2.25 compared to Earth. And if you keep going down and by Jupiter, there's hardly any solar flux left. And then, you know, Saturn, Uranus, une, Pluto, you know, there isn't [00:23:20] any sun. And in principle you could be in the vicinity of another star, and then suddenly you can use that star's energy. But for the, for the moment, for the next a [00:23:30] hundred years or so, while we are still kind of stuck to our solar system, we have, you know, we only have the sun to, to, uh, as our, as our source of energy.

[00:23:39] Bhavya: [00:23:40] And, it is either that or nuclear. And obviously we have batteries, but batteries don't last very long. The example I have is, you know, there was a, I'm sure you know about this, the [00:23:50] Hogans mission. Uh,

[00:23:52] Markus: Yes. 

[00:23:52] Markus: Yeah. Mm-hmm. 

[00:23:53] Bhavya: um, um, you know, it, and again, cost of about six, $700 million. It had no more than three [00:24:00] hours of battery life, most of which was planned to be used during the descent to the surface. Um, you know, planners expected to get atmos 30 minutes [00:24:10] of data from the surface. And again,

[00:24:12] Bhavya: know, 

[00:24:12] Markus: Huh? 

[00:24:12] Bhavya: millions of 

[00:24:13] Bhavya: dollars for 30 minutes of data. And again, another European mission, the lander cost about two $50 million. [00:24:20] It went into hibernation after just 60 hours of operating

[00:24:24] Markus: remember. 

[00:24:25] Bhavya: 67, P six, seven P cg. [00:24:30] and they did not operate again. um, yeah, so we, we spent a lot of money on our, on our space missions, and we want to, you know, as taxpayers, we should, [00:24:40] we should want to get more out of, of all the effort that our scientists and engineers put into designing these missions,

[00:24:46] Markus: More mileage out of our investments. So, [00:24:50] but again, this, this raise and so I'm, I keep coming back to the original question. Why, if, if we're someone is investing hundreds of millions of [00:25:00] euros slash dollars into something and then you have a battery that lasts three hours, um, I guess the valid question [00:25:10] could be is no one thinking about alternatives, which of course, I'm not assuming or are legal and policy, [00:25:20] um, in place that do not allow for such considerations.

[00:25:25] Bhavya: I mean, tons of people are thinking about it. In fact, this announcement from NASA is [00:25:30] exactly because people are, and again, it might seem that it came out of left field. Um, but you know, we have been investing in nuclear for a very long time. In fact, um, in know some of [00:25:40] the studies that have been done. So we've spent in the United States loan many more than $20 billion developing these systems. So, so, so we understand they're important. We have [00:25:50] been investing in them. But I think what we haven't had until recently is a very strong mission poll. Uh, and I think the, you know, the NASA announcement [00:26:00] gives us that strong mission poll. Um, let me give you an example of a strong mission poll. So, you know, I said at the start of our discussion why the Russian, the Soviets launched reactors.

[00:26:09] Bhavya: Why [00:26:10] didn't the rest of the world? Well, they needed to follow the American fleet all over the world. They did not have radar systems that were very good from high [00:26:20] altitudes. they needed to operate at low altitudes, but then at low altitudes, it was allotted drag. So they couldn't, um, you know, they needed something to keep [00:26:30] the satellites in orbit that didn't have good solar panels.

[00:26:32] Bhavya: So they had no choice but to use nuclear systems, right? So, so that's why Soviets launched more than [00:26:40] 30 reactors in the, in the, in the seventies and eighties. Uh, and that is a really good example of, you know, nuclear being enhancing as in making something that we were gonna do. Any [00:26:50] we could do with other means, but it's just a little bit better versus enabling where if you didn't have nuclear, you couldn't do it at all. I think [00:27:00] nuclear makes a best case when it is in that latter scenario. So, you know, on the moon, as I said, I mean, there's 14 days of day, right? You, you do not need nuclear for that. [00:27:10] You need nuclear for the 14 days of night where the temperature plunges to near zero. and you may, and again, you know, um, United [00:27:20] States and, and its allies are planning to, uh, be on the moon for an extended period.

[00:27:24] Bhavya: They will have humans. There's private company that want to, uh, mine things on the [00:27:30] moon. there's, you know, um,

[00:27:33] Markus: All this means that, um, if we're taking some of the visionaries, we have unearthed seriously, [00:27:40] um, um, the visionaries selling us a dream that in the next five to 10 years there will be humans on Mars. [00:27:50] Um, if ever that is possible, that's the vision. But still, if we want to do something or achieve something like this, we need [00:28:00] also to develop those nuclear solutions right now.

[00:28:03] Markus: So that means someone, if those visions are take being taken seriously, [00:28:10] someone is developing those technologies right now on Earth. Is That right? 

[00:28:14] Bhavya: That is correct. I mean, I, uh, NASA has been working on, [00:28:20] fission surface power for the last five years, they have made a lot of progress. Um, they have been. Space, nuclear programs and other parts of the government as well. And [00:28:30] again, I don't know enough about what's happening in Europe, but, um, uh, the Department of Defense has, um, uh, has developed, um, is [00:28:40] developing, uh, nuclear power systems.

[00:28:42] Bhavya: There was a program that was recently ended, uh, at darpa, uh, an agency within DOD in Department of Defense. I was [00:28:50] collaborating with NASA to develop new femoral propulsion. So, so there have been, there have been efforts. Um, it's just unfortunate that they have ended. And [00:29:00] again, to repeat myself, I think one reason they have ended is because there hasn't been that mission pull for something enabling up until now. And again, there's a whole bunch of factors that have come together. So mission [00:29:10] pull is just one. Another one is we actually now have policy clarity, uh, and, and, um, uh, in 2020. Uh, the [00:29:20] United States came out with what's called National Security Presidential Memorandum, 20 NSPM 20, that laid out the process for how you would launch a space [00:29:30] nuclear system up until 2020.

[00:29:32] Bhavya: There was a s there was a process, it was called 25, just, acronyms and numbers, but it wasn't [00:29:40] clear enough. And, um, you know, with NS VM 20, now it's clear. So that actually even allowed commercial companies to, uh, start to develop nuclear systems. And [00:29:50] many new commercial companies actually came about because now there's a pathway to launch. Uh, other things that kind of have happened is, you know, it used to be that we could [00:30:00] only use highly enrich uranium to, um, develop to, to, to launch or operate nuclear systems in space. In recent years, uh, some researchers, [00:30:10] um, determined that you can actually use low enrich uranium, or what's called high assay, low enrich uranium Halo. And that was a huge, uh, step [00:30:20] forward because now suddenly, um, you weren't using weapons grade uranium to, to launch. And again, there's some security concerns around using weapons grade [00:30:30] uranium. Uh, so that's another really big important, um, um, a step. Another one is, uh, private sector readiness. So on the [00:30:40] uh, supply side, uh, there is, you know, a growing commercial terrestrial nuclear industry. And these are companies that are investing, there's venture [00:30:50] funding. They are looking at very exciting new designs that actually have space applications. So in the olden days, we only had, you know, water, you know, pressurized or boiling water [00:31:00] PWRs or BWS precious water reactors or boiling water reactors. Some of these new reactors are using, um, uh, technologies that are actually relevant for space. So, for example, [00:31:10] sodium pool or helium pool reactors. Uh, in the last big, uh, development is on the. On the demand side as well. So, you know, some, there are [00:31:20] some private companies that want power on the moon, so, um, they're willing to invest in that. So a lot of things have come together that [00:31:30] suddenly now we have, you know, the, the, the sign that maybe this is the time where we can actually, uh, make things happen.

[00:31:37] Bhavya: I'm an 

[00:31:38] Markus: Hmm. I assume that, [00:31:40] um, firing up a nuclear reactor on earth versus activating one in space is not equally [00:31:50] difficult slash easy, so it's not the same, I guess. So where are the major, the main differences between activating a reactor in space and unearth.[00:32:00]

[00:32:00] Bhavya: So, um, one major difference already is that right now at least, um, we are looking at space reactors that are in the tense. Two hundreds of [00:32:10] kilowatts. And just to give you a sense, um, a hundred kilowatt is basically a commercial, um, air conditioning [00:32:20] system. So it is not a very large, um, um, uh, reactor. And actually I did, I I, I did an analogy in my head. Um, [00:32:30] if we do a hundred kilowatt react on the moon, which is what NASA has announced, it is basically about 15 ish metric tons. So in the size of an large African [00:32:40] elephant, it's gonna need a very large radiator. And we can talk about y and the radiator is assigned size of a basketball court. So, and those things look really big. [00:32:50] But in, you know, compared to the, you know, thousand megawatt reactors, which are huge pieces of land on earth, they are quite small compared to, um, [00:33:00] earth reactors. The other really big difference likely is going to be space reactors will be very highly autonomous. We are not going to be having, you know, [00:33:10] humans, uh, power them up and down again, um, you know, though that is, you know, one of the challenges we need to address, we need to make sure we know how to, you know, how [00:33:20] to a reactor completely autonomously,

[00:33:25] Markus: I, I assume that the highly enriched uranium needs to [00:33:30] be fabricated. It needs to be produced on Earth, or is there a way to, in c to produce highly enriched uranium wherever you are on [00:33:40] Mars or on the moon?

[00:33:42] Bhavya: right? So, one thing, I mean, as I was saying that we are actually moving away from using H hu highly enrich

[00:33:47] Markus: Yes. 

[00:33:48] Bhavya: using lower Enrich

[00:33:49] Bhavya: which 

[00:33:49] Markus: Yes, [00:33:50]

[00:33:50] Bhavya: already produce a lot of on Earth for, you know, earth users. And, and some of the newer companies, like I mentioned, will be using this, this new kind of lower, low enrich uranium [00:34:00] called Kalu High acid, low enrich Uran. And yes, that we are not, I mean, at least not in the near term. Um, we are not planning to have the mining, [00:34:10] uh, uranium on other celestial bodies. It'll be, these reactors would be fueled on earth and they would be sort of one time fueled. There's no going, there's no [00:34:20] refueling. At least not in the way we are currently planning our, uh, space.

[00:34:23] Bhavya: Nuclear reactors.

[00:34:25] Markus: do. Do we already know that there is uranium sources [00:34:30] of Earth? Do we already know about them,

[00:34:33] Bhavya: upper geology is in my area, so I don't know. But I mean, I am, I wouldn't be surprised if we find all sorts of [00:34:40] elements. I mean, the, the solar system is big we have a very large, you know, belt in between Mars and Jupiter, so I wouldn't be surprised. But this, I [00:34:50] don't uh, in any case, it, it is probably going to be very difficult to mine. And remember, mining is just one piece after you

[00:34:58] Markus: Mm. 

[00:34:59] Bhavya: you know, [00:35:00] refine, you have to enrich. I mean, there's a lot of steps before, uh, you, you know, you yellow cake, which is what it's called on earth, to go from yellow cake to a, um, [00:35:10] fully manufactured fuel rod is, is a lot of work. I don't think that unless, you know, I don't know if you're, you watch this TV show expands where all these

[00:35:19] Markus: Yes. [00:35:20] Absolutely. 

[00:35:20] Markus: Yeah. 

[00:35:20] Bhavya: I I think 

[00:35:21] Markus: it. 

[00:35:22] Bhavya: there yet. 

[00:35:23] Markus: what is the legal framework right now on earth, um, regarding nuclear in space? Is there [00:35:30] any restrictions? Do we have a global understanding of what we can do, what we cannot do?

[00:35:36] Bhavya: So, as I said, we have been launching nuclear systems, [00:35:40] uh, you know, for the last 60 or so years. So I don't think that there is, you know, anything crazy new. That we need to be doing. Uh, there is, um, you know, the outer [00:35:50] space treaty, which is, you know, the, one of the biggest treaty uh, that, that we, that guides our activities in space, has no restrictions on the use of nuclear.

[00:35:59] Bhavya: The only thing [00:36:00] it restricts is, you know, weapons of mass destruction. So, you know, let's not be making bombs, in space and, you know, obviously nobody wants to do that. there's also, [00:36:10] um, a policy, uh, that I think is called, um, um, principles 47 68 or something like that, that has, uh, originally for [00:36:20] safe operations.

[00:36:20] Bhavya: And again, these were developed by, you know, smart people who know nuclear well. So they are, you know, they're very aligned with how, you know, how we are thinking about launching nuclear [00:36:30] systems. So, so there is no, there are no deal breakers, there are no shop, uh, showstoppers. and, and, and that's internationally And of course at the domestic level in [00:36:40] the United States. You know, there is enough, uh, both congressional policy and executive branch policy that lays out how you would do this. so yeah, [00:36:50] so, um, you know, is, there is nothing that stops us from, from doing things in space. I mean, one, one, uh, thought that does come to mind is, [00:37:00] um, and the outer space, 3D Article six says that every private sector activity must have, what is that?

[00:37:08] Bhavya: Authorization and [00:37:10] continuing supervision. if the reactor that operates on the moon is private, which is what it seems, again, I, I don't have good insight into what NASA's [00:37:20] planning, but let's assume that they're expecting private parties to launch these reactors and, and give them, uh, and basically cell power to NASA and others on the moon. [00:37:30] There isn't any, way to provide that. Article six coverage, the, you know, authorization and continuing supervision. [00:37:40] Beyond some minimal things. So I think we probably need to work through that. but there's, and there's a lot of work underway on that. In fact, I understand that there may [00:37:50] be some executive order in the United States coming out that, uh, gives, um, the US Department of Commerce that authority. So I think we are working towards a[00:38:00]

[00:38:00] Markus: Mm-hmm. A very practical question I'd like to discuss. Um, so I could imagine that once, uh, we're ready to launch something [00:38:10] nuclear into space, nuclear, other than a battery, but something more nuclear into space. Um, what is the actual risk, uh, when launching nuclear [00:38:20] materials into orbit, um, toward Moon or Mars, and how is it mitigated?

[00:38:25] Markus: Um, I, of course, I'm also talking about containment systems. [00:38:30] Are there any, any interesting solutions already? Or is this still a problem and needs to be developed?

[00:38:37] Bhavya: Yeah. So, uh, a lot of the risk [00:38:40] depends on the actual design of the system. But one thing that is important to note is that any reactor that is launched, or at least any [00:38:50] reactor that's launched from the United States will be launched gold. And by that, what I mean by that is. they will not have any fission, they would not have been [00:39:00] used up before.

[00:39:00] Bhavya: So there's no fission products and fission product is, is is essentially what is radioactive in, in a nuclear reactor until you start a nuclear reactor. It's [00:39:10] just like any other element. So uranium 2 35 is not chemically or radiologically, um, that much more toxic. In fact, the James we Space [00:39:20] Telescope, which was launched in 2021, I think, um, had a lot of beryllium.

[00:39:26] Bhavya: And beryllium is actually poisonous. Almost every launch that we [00:39:30] have of, of, of, of rockets in space has some amount of hydrazine, which is a, you know, which is a

[00:39:36] Markus: Hmm. Mm-hmm. 

[00:39:37] Bhavya: it's highly toxic. So, so we are, [00:39:40] we, we have already, um, uh, in place about, you know, launch of toxic materials. but uranium 2 35 isn't toxic in the same way. So that's one thing. [00:39:50] The reactors would be launched cold and they will not be turned on until they reach. A place which is, which is deemed safe. So it might be thousands of kilometers over earth, [00:40:00] or it might be some part of the moon, which is, you know, decided that this is, you know, this is where we will put the reactor and this is how we will make sure that it has, you know, you know, a good [00:40:10] safeties zone around it. Um, the one thing that some people have talked about is what happens if there's an accident and the reactor falls in ocean water and it falls in this [00:40:20] very specific configuration and angle and, and compression that it goes, um, what's called critical in the nuclear lingo. [00:40:30] Um, those are the things, those are, that, that would be one scenario we would avoid to design.

[00:40:35] Bhavya: So, and then again, there's a lot of designs people, uh, talk about, for example, [00:40:40] you know, you could break it up into two so that two Hals never come in contact. So, so that's a design problem. And again, uh, uh, there's in the regulations in the United States and Europe are [00:40:50] sufficiently stringent. That, uh, a lot of these issues will be addressed before, um, uh, reactors launch, there's a process called, um, [00:41:00] nepa. Um, there's an environmental review, and then there's another, um, uh, process called, and again, I'm not gonna be able to remember what it stands for, iner, and it's a, it's, [00:41:10] a review board that looks at safety. Uh, there's a thing called SAR Safety Analysis Review, which is prepared by the team designing the [00:41:20] reactor that says, Hey, this is what it did to make the reactor safe. And then an outside body does what is called A-S-R-S-E-R, which is a safety [00:41:30] EV evaluation review, but they basically evaluate the sar. So there's many layers of review before a reactor has sign off. [00:41:40] And based on nuclear safety, uh, national, um, national security, presidential memorandum 20 and SPM 20, uh, uh, vision reactor will likely need sign off from the [00:41:50] president of the United States. So a lot of review is going to happen before a reactor is launched.

[00:41:56] Markus: Is the bad reputation that nuclear has on [00:42:00] earth? Is this an exaggerated reaction to perhaps a historical, a historically grown [00:42:10] understanding, um, of nuclear technology? Of course, I'm also talking, I'm talking about the Cold War period and whatnot. So what is it with the [00:42:20] perception problem that we have with nuclear?

[00:42:23] Bhavya: That's a great question, Markus, and again, I'm not a historian, but if I had to guess, start [00:42:30] of the nuclear age was with an atomic bong. So we started nuclear by killing people,

[00:42:37] Markus: Hmm. 

[00:42:37] Bhavya: I think we just, we just [00:42:40] never got over that. I think if we had started nuclear as a, you know, for peaceful applications, we probably wouldn't worry. As much. Because even if you look at the actual [00:42:50] accidents, you know, Fukushima, in the, in Japan, people who died were the people being, you know, evacuated from the city, not from radiation. Three Mile [00:43:00] Island considered the worst Italian, uh, accident in the United States. Not a single person died. So, so it is truly perceptions about, you know, [00:43:10] what might happen, in reality, this is not how it has been. And part of, I think for those of us who think about this part of our [00:43:20] job is to actually, um, you know, not under the safety issues and how, you know, how citizens think about nuclear and, and [00:43:30] try to educate. so for example, you know, standing outside a nuclear reactor in on Earth. Is for a whole year.

[00:43:38] Bhavya: Like if you just don't go [00:43:40] anywhere, get a chair, sit outside a nuclear reactor for a year, that's as much radiation as you would get in a chest x-ray, right? So I think we just need to talk more about it. We [00:43:50] need to explain and, and hopefully, um, you know, we can help our, you know, fellow citizens understand the, the pros and cons.

[00:43:59] Markus: [00:44:00] I'm being very open with you. Um, I also, I'm, I'm a child of the seventies. Um, I was raised also [00:44:10] anti-nuclear and this is how I grew up, and so I'm. I'm just wondering, because this is a question that's rarely discussed, or I'm missing that debate [00:44:20] in how far does nuclear technology also undergo an evolution in, as a, as a technology?

[00:44:28] Markus: Does it, I mean, [00:44:30] like the nuclear reactors we have on earth, they are from a certain period, um, when they were developed. And so they are decades old. [00:44:40] So are they getting safer? Do we, we are hearing that in China there is newer aversions, the sodium, I think sodium [00:44:50] called, uh, reactors and whatnot. So is this technology getting safer?

[00:44:57] Bhavya: I think so I am [00:45:00] not completely current on Earth technology. I would say we are working harder for the reactors to be [00:45:10] what's called being passively safe, as in. Safe without actively fiddling with knobs and things. So I think that's what happened with Three Mile Island [00:45:20] in order to make things better, they switched off some things that made things worse.

[00:45:24] Bhavya: Right. So I think the big lesson from those times was, can we do something that if something goes wrong, we [00:45:30] just go, oh, don't touch anything and it'll come back. You know, it'll, it'll you know, shut, shut down by itself. So that's part of what I think some of the newer designs are, and, and we are trying [00:45:40] to make them safer by making, making them passively safe.

[00:45:43] Bhavya: So that's one thing I know we are doing, but I don't think the old reactors are less safe at all in that while [00:45:50] they may need to be actively managed, that active management does happen. And, you know, most of the reactors in the United States in particular, I know more about, they're actually [00:46:00] extending their lives because they're just working so well. I don't think there is any weight, any reason to think that all the reactors are not safer.

[00:46:09] Markus: [00:46:10] where's the big hurdle now? We're in the middle of a space race. Um, this is a huge industry that is getting evermore [00:46:20] momentum as we speak, and there are grand visions on the horizon as to what we can do in our vicinity, on the moon, on Mars, et cetera. [00:46:30] Do you think that nuclear will play a role in the years to come, or is this still a niche technology that needs to find its [00:46:40] place?

[00:46:40] Bhavya: I think the debates are more around how do we make it happen, not, not that if it needs to happen. I think we are, you know, going to Moon and [00:46:50] Mars is something that the United States at least has decided to do together with allies in Europe and Japan and, and India and other countries. And as we go deeper into the [00:47:00] solar system, as we try to do more things, we will need high density power.

[00:47:04] Bhavya: I mean, it's, it's the same argument I made at the start, start of our discussion. If, if we had only [00:47:10] candlelight as opposed to electricity, think of how little we could do it is essentially the same idea in space. And as we want to do more things in space, we've kinda, you know, done the little stuff, right?

[00:47:19] Bhavya: [00:47:20] We've been to every planet in the solar system now. We want to orbit every planet. Right now. We want to land on Europa. We want to dig through the ice. And the [00:47:30] more of these things we need to do, the more we need a source of power that is, you know, higher density, doesn't need the sun, um, can be taken more easily.

[00:47:39] Bhavya: And the [00:47:40] other big, um, breakthrough we've had is, or we, we will likely have is that we, we will have heavier lift. So, um, we can actually now take bigger [00:47:50] things as compared with before where, you know, everything had to be super extra duper light. Um, so we were trying to make the lightest solar sip, you know, solar panels we could make, et [00:48:00] cetera.

[00:48:00] Bhavya: So now we can take heavier things and, you know, nuclear reacts will likely be heavier than, uh, some of the other things. So, um, yeah, so I think a lot of stuff is changing that, [00:48:10] we will have no choice. And again, even nuclear technology is evolving and getting better. Um, so I'm, I'm very, um, optimistic and [00:48:20] enthusiastic.

[00:48:21] Markus: I love that that's really hurt, that someone is enthusiastic about nuclear. So, um. But it's your job, [00:48:30] obviously, so I'm very thankful for, for your wisdom, um, and expertise you just mentioned, um, Europa and digging, uh, through the Ice Shield of [00:48:40] Europa. I think this topic is so fascinating. We just should talk a little bit about it, what that means.

[00:48:48] Markus: So [00:48:50] Europa has a huge ice shield and potentially a, an even huge ocean underneath it. And we're interested in tapping [00:49:00] into that, um, unknown body of water. And this would be handled through a nuclear powered drill. Could you explain what that [00:49:10] means?

[00:49:11] Bhavya: Well, first of all, I don't think, um, there's, I mean, I, I don't think there's a mission where this is being done. I, I, um, again, I'm not a space [00:49:20] scientist and I hope you will invite, you know, a space scientist and, and talk more about this. Um, the idea is that we need to dig through the minor miles of ice and, [00:49:30] and there's no sun.

[00:49:32] Bhavya: So, you know, once you dig, it freezes on top. So you need to somehow keep it, liquid. So nuclear is, is [00:49:40] obviously an obvious option, but maybe there's others too. Um, and again, even with a nuclear, you could have radioisotope, which is just, you know, basically a hot rock. And the hot rock just [00:49:50] sinks, uh, versus a visions where you are, you know, actively, um, breaking up atoms. And again, I don't think those decisions have been made. I'm just, you know, I'm just positing [00:50:00] that. As you do hard things, you will need more power and nuclear is a way to do more power. But I, I'm not aware of how, uh, scientists plan to [00:50:10] go dig through Europe, but there's actually a really awesome movie called The Europa Report, which everybody needs to watch,

[00:50:17] Markus: The Europa 

[00:50:18] Markus: report. 

[00:50:19] Bhavya: yes, [00:50:20] it is.

[00:50:20] Bhavya: Uh, it is just a fantastic, fantastic movie. And it's basically the story of we discovered life on, we, we believe we've discovered life on Europa, understand a human mission [00:50:30] Europa and how they find life, and it was just amazing, amazing movie.

[00:50:37] Markus: Do you think there's life out there 

[00:50:38] Markus: somewhere? 

[00:50:39] Bhavya: [00:50:40] Absolutely. I know it.

[00:50:42] Markus: Well, absolutely. This is kind of very spontaneous. So, so you, you have to tell me more about the why. Absolutely. Is this, is this a gut feeling or is [00:50:50] it a feeling from a scientist doing the statistics?

[00:50:54] Bhavya: Fair point. Uh, it is more of a, it's more of a wish than, [00:51:00] than really knowing for sure. I think, was it Carl Sagan who said something like, you know,

[00:51:04] Bhavya: there 

[00:51:05] Markus: I. 

[00:51:05] Bhavya: out there that would be a damn, you know, shame, waste of space or something. [00:51:10] Um, uh, and you know, we have, you know, there's billions of stars.

[00:51:13] Bhavya: Each of the stars has planets around it. And again, uh, you know, the Drake equation, and [00:51:20] if you kind of do the math, it just, it just is reasonable that there is life. But then on the other hand, there's also the affirming paradox, like, if there is life, why, where are they?[00:51:30]

[00:51:30] Markus: Yes. 

[00:51:31] Markus: Yeah. 

[00:51:31] Bhavya: you know, people have all these ideas.

[00:51:33] Bhavya: So a few months ago I was visiting the Seti Institute. In San Francisco and you know, I had a chance to talk to a lot of the [00:51:40] scientists there who had all sorts of really interesting theories on why we haven't found life. I'm actually very, very certain that there is, you know, microscopic life [00:51:50] even in the solar system.

[00:51:51] Bhavya: What I'm more concerned about is if there's intelligent life there is this theory of the great filter that you know,

[00:51:59] Markus: [00:52:00] Mm-hmm. 

[00:52:00] Bhavya: some point extinguish itself you at what stage of the great filter humanity is at, right? At will [00:52:10] we extinguish ourselves before we become space fairing? Has that happened?

[00:52:15] Bhavya: So that is a, that is a question that I do think about a lot that, you know, is an intelligent life [00:52:20] out there, because that is a way more interest to me. I mean, I think it's great. I mean, I, I think we'll find, we'll find life in the solar system in this decade. I'm sure it, that's, [00:52:30] you know, microscopic life, whether it's on, in solid dust or Europa or, or even Mars.

[00:52:34] Bhavya: Right? I mean that's, I mean, it's important obviously. but what's exciting is if [00:52:40] there's, you know, star Trek life.

[00:52:42] Markus: I like this great filter, um, theory. I've come across it a while ago and I think we're. [00:52:50] As a species right now, we are trying very hard to not make it through that filter, um, at the moment on earth because we're doing [00:53:00] everything to extinguish ourselves. Um, so maybe, maybe this is, this is a good moment to, to reconsider [00:53:10] because if we want to find life out there, and if we find life out there, that means that [00:53:20] another civilization or another species was smart enough to make it through that filter.

[00:53:27] Markus: And so this should give us hope [00:53:30] that we have a future and there is a future beyond the mindless [00:53:40] craziness that is going on on our planet right now.

[00:53:44] Bhavya: I 100% agree with you, Markus. In fact, if we find microscopic life that is, that is [00:53:50] actually caused for some sadness because it kind of gives you more data that you know, that more life has gone ex ex, you know, um, extinct [00:54:00] than not. Um, and, um, maybe my optimism is trying to look past [00:54:10] what you just said. It seems that our efforts to extinguish ourselves and, and actually that's why working on space gives me great hope.

[00:54:19] Bhavya: I mean, most of [00:54:20] my friends and colleagues who work in space are just optimists. They, they look, you know, they, they, they imagine a, a better future than than the, the, the present. [00:54:30] And, know, all of us try to make us go past all of the craziness of what you know, of what we see around [00:54:40] us ourselves today.

[00:54:42] Markus: this is my personal view on things. I think what we're experiencing right now is the last [00:54:50] breath of an old system struggling to survive and knowing at the same time that the 20th century, the patriarchal, [00:55:00] white, old men driven system is over. And I think this is what we're experiencing right now.

[00:55:08] Markus: We have still [00:55:10] white old men trying to, keep that 20th century mindset alive, but we all know it's over. We are in the 21st century, , and I'm [00:55:20] very positive that we're gonna make it through it.

[00:55:23] Bhavya: Yeah, I'll, I'll stick to my knitting stay an engineer. But, uh, yes, I mean, obviously I [00:55:30] always think the future is brighter than the past, and we need to do everything we can, to make sure that that is the case. You know, that I think the best way to predict the future is to make it, which is[00:55:40]

[00:55:40] Markus: Fantastic. 

[00:55:41] Bhavya: trying to, to focus on.

[00:55:43] Markus: Yeah. Baia, I have a nerd question, uh, for you because if we're talking about [00:55:50] civilizations out there, we would need to take a look for, uh, uh, ourselves. And so we would need to travel very far. And there is, uh, science fiction movies [00:56:00] and books and science based of course on scientific theory. And there's one theory that, um, you use, uh, nuclear [00:56:10] bombs, um, as propulsion methods.

[00:56:13] Markus: So you throw in a certain period, uh, throw nuclear bombs behind your spacecraft [00:56:20] and you detonate them and use this as a propulsion system. Is this something beyond science [00:56:30] fiction? Does this make sense?

[00:56:32] Bhavya: So, uh, so you bring such a great, um, um, historical point. and just for those of you who [00:56:40] don't know this, uh, there was a project called, a program called Project Orion in the United States in the 1950s. Started and I think at end of the fifties, ended up ended in mid [00:56:50] sixties. And the fundamental idea there was to use a series of controlled nuclear explosions.

[00:56:55] Bhavya: Basically detonating nuclear bombs behind the spacecraft to generate thrust [00:57:00] via a pusher plate, uh, effectively turning nuclear blasts into the engine of interplanetary travel. And they had a really ambitious mission dates. Um, uh, this [00:57:10] is, um, you know, they wanted, they said Mars by 1965, Saturn by 1970. So like they were, and they, they were talking about with people, right? It was an extraordinary concept. I mean, [00:57:20] imagine a Saturn five, you know, the Apollo rocket carrying hundreds of nuclear bomb as pulse units to propel it. Um, but you know, the program was [00:57:30] canceled because, um, there was a test ban free that was signed by the United States of the Soviet Union in, in 1963. And then obviously there were concerns about environmental safety [00:57:40] and nuclear proliferation as well. 

[00:57:44] Markus: I completely do. I completely do not understand where that comes from.

[00:57:49] Bhavya: uh, yeah, I [00:57:50] mean, I think the, for people like Freeman Dyson, who was a famous physicist of, of the time, I think they, they thought it was, you know, two for on, you know, you both do, know, high [00:58:00] ISP, you know, high, you know, high, high efficiency, uh, space travel and get rid of the nuclear bombs. Uh, so, you know, uh, this was a time when [00:58:10] there was a lot of creativity and, you know, people thought they could do anything. And obviously over time we learned that there's some things we just cannot or shouldn't [00:58:20] do. And I don't think, you know, we are going to be detonating nuclear bombs, uh, to

[00:58:26] Markus: Anytime soon,[00:58:30]

[00:58:31] Markus: Baja. Um, if the call came, would you be ready to go into space? How far would you travel?

[00:58:39] Bhavya: You know, [00:58:40] I, I would, I would absolutely say yes, but I would want to beg my husband and daughter to go with me. I don't think I'll be happy without them. I can't imagine the thought of, you know, leaving them behind. So [00:58:50] hopefully they'll come with me and then I'll go,

[00:58:53] Markus: you 

[00:58:53] Markus: would go?

[00:58:55] Markus: I think I would go, um, I would maybe have, uh, need to have a discussion with [00:59:00] my family. Um, I don't know about my teenage daughters. I dunno if they would come or maybe prefer staying with their friends. [00:59:10] Um, but anyways, yes, I, I think I would go. But my question to you, um, has a reason because we have a fun tradition here on the Space Cafe [00:59:20] Podcast.

[00:59:21] Markus: Um, I'm asking my guests, um, this question because usually traveling in space [00:59:30] is in the beginning an exciting thing, but it wears, I could imagine it wears off pretty quickly and gets boring at some point because those [00:59:40] travel times and distances are long and vast. So my question to you is to keep your spirits entertained [00:59:50] and to keep yourself, um, from, from going insane.

[00:59:54] Markus: What kind of one piece of music, what's the one piece of music you would want to [01:00:00] bring on your playlist on that interstellar or interplanetary journey?

[01:00:06] Bhavya: Oh goodness. I [01:00:10] would probably take music from the 1970s. I would take Ava with me

[01:00:16] Markus: Fanta, 

[01:00:16] Bhavya: that? 

[01:00:18] Markus: fantastic. Um, we haven't [01:00:20] had this before. Fantastic. I love that tune. So, by the way, I'm gonna put it up on, uh, a real playlist on Spotify. It's the playlist for the aspiring space traveler. [01:00:30] And, um, dancing Queen will be added to it once we, once this episode goes online. So thank you so much for that contribution.

[01:00:39] Markus: and my [01:00:40] last question to you, uh, Baia. I challenge you to share with the audience a strong shot of inspiration, sort of an espresso for the [01:00:50] mind, and you pick whatever kind of topic you want to pick.

[01:00:53] Markus: What's your shot of inspiration you'd like to share?[01:01:00]

[01:01:01] Bhavya: Think of abundance. We have spent our entire lives on the entirety of human existence has been about [01:01:10] scarcity, we are heading into a time where whether it's power or it's other resources, as the, as the solar system opens up, [01:01:20] we have access to resources and we have more abundance. We bring the solar system into our socioeconomic realm. [01:01:30] we grow as humanity. That's my shot of inspiration. We are entering an era of abundance.

[01:01:39] Markus: And [01:01:40] we are most likely we will live to experience and see all this firsthand. Isn't this an amazing moment in time in human history? [01:01:50] I.

[01:01:50] Bhavya: Absolutely. We are at a very special time in human history, and I cannot be more excited about what's coming next in our 

[01:01:57] Markus: If we make it through that filter.

[01:01:58] Bhavya: if we make it through that [01:02:00] filter, which we will because we are working towards it. Many of us are working towards 

[01:02:04] Markus: Yeah. 

[01:02:04] Bhavya: you. 

[01:02:05] Markus: Thank you. Thank you, uh, Dr. Ba Al for taking the time. This was a lot of [01:02:10] fun. Thank you so much.

[01:02:11] Bhavya: I super enjoyed it. Thank you again, Markus, for your time too. 

[01:02:14] Markus: And that's a wrap my friends. Um, I don't know about you. It did. [01:02:20] Kind of shift my attitude toward nuclear, not on earth. Um, I'm still against nuclear on earth, but, uh, it's, I think it's, um, it's a no [01:02:30] brainer for space. Um, why I'm against it on earth, maybe because my lack of knowledge is hindering. Any other thoughts?

[01:02:39] Markus: [01:02:40] Lack of knowledge regarding new forms of nuclear reactor technology because. Um, honestly, the ones who are criticizing the [01:02:50] ones where all that in my head, anti-nuclear attitude and well sentiment comes from is old generations of [01:03:00] nuclear reactors. Um, I do not know about the new. Versions if there are new versions.

[01:03:06] Markus: I hear that China does some interesting stuff and [01:03:10] whatnot, so I don't know if those things are any safer. Um, and just to be on a safe side, let's go for nuclear if [01:03:20] need be, and if it must be in space first, um, maybe that's a safe way, safer way to put it. Um. I would love to hear [01:03:30] your, um, position on all this.

[01:03:33] Markus: Drop me a note at podcast at Space Watch Global, or, um, let's, um, fire up a [01:03:40] conversation, uh, on LinkedIn. At my profile. Um, if this is of any use to you, um, this episode, consider sending it or sharing it with a [01:03:50] friend? Or someone who may take a benefit from this discussion.

[01:03:57] Markus: And, um, without further ado, [01:04:00] uh, there's nothing more to say other than thank you from the bottom of my heart that you're still listening to all this. Um, it's really a lot of [01:04:10] fun to do this and a lot of fun to see the little Space Watch Global Universe, bro. So thank you. Um, I would like to reach out to [01:04:20] you personally, but it's a little tricky.

[01:04:22] Markus: Um, but thank you. Um, I'd like to address you by name, so put in your name [01:04:30] now. Thank you, my friend. Bye-bye. Until in two weeks from now. I.