Ambient office = 109 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 118 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 121 nanosieverts per hour

Blueberry from Central Market = 66 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 84 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 77 nanosieverts per hour

Part 1 of 2 Parts
    There has been a lot of well-known public figures talking about the role that hydrogen may play in the global shift to a more sustainable future. Some have expressed skepticism about the usefulness of hydrogen but many think it could help reduce emissions in a number of sectors, including transportation and heavy industry. There has been a lot of media debate recently about hydrogen and its importance as a tool in securing a low-carbon future. However, the vast majority of its current production is still based on fossil fuels. According to a September 2022 tracking report from the international Energy Agency, low-emission hydrogen production in 2021 accounted for less than one percent of global hydrogen production. If hydrogen is going to have any role in the planned energy transition, then hydrogen generation needs to change in a big way.
     Rachael Rothman is co-director of the Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures at the University of Sheffield. She said, “The first thing to say is that hydrogen doesn’t really exist naturally, so it has to be produced. It has a lot of potential to help us decarbonize going forwards, but we need to find low-carbon ways of producing it in the first place.” Hydrogen production methods are identified by different colors. “About 95% of our hydrogen today comes from steam methane reforming and has a large associated carbon footprint, and that’s what’s called ‘grey’ hydrogen.”
     According to the energy firm National Grid, grey hydrogen is created from natural gas or methane. The greenhouse gases associated with the process are not captured. This constitutes the big carbon footprint that Rothman refers to. The dominance of such a method of hydrogen production is clearly not in keeping with net-zero goals. As a result, an array of sources, systems and colors of hydrogen are now being suggested as alternatives.
      These methods include green hydrogen, which refers to hydrogen produced using renewables and electrolysis in which electric current splits water into oxygen and hydrogen.
     Blue hydrogen indicates that natural gas was used in generation with carbon capture utilization and storage. There has been an intense debate about the role that blue hydrogen could play in the decarbonization of society.
      Pink hydrogen has been attracting attention lately. Its process incorporates electrolysis. However the key difference between it and green hydrogen is that pink generation depends on nuclear power.
      Rothman said, “If you split … water, you get hydrogen and oxygen. But splitting water takes energy, so what pink hydrogen is about is splitting water using energy that has come from nuclear. This means that the whole system is low carbon, because … there’s no carbon in water … but also the energy source is also very low carbon because it’s nuclear.”
     Rothman pointed out that while electrolysis could be used with nuclear power, something called a thermochemical cycle could also be driven by nuclear power. She explained that the thermochemical cycle uses extreme temperatures to split water into oxygen and hydrogen.
Please read Part 2 next

Ambient office = 103 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 135 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 137 nanosieverts per hour

Avocado from Central Market = 100 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 93 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 83 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office = 92 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 112 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 114 nanosieverts per hour

Tomato from Central Market = 91 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 85 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 73 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office = 80 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 112 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 110 nanosieverts per hour

Red bell pepper from Central Market = 80 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 107 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 92 nanosieverts per hour

Dover Sole from Central = 93 nanosieverts per hour

      Former engineers from SpaceX are working on a portable microreactor that is lightweight and cost-effect. They call it the “world’s first portable, zero-emissions power source.”
     The microreactor project was originally intended to be a develop a power source for a Martian colony. The group of engineers decided that Earth needed it more. They founded a company named Radiant to continue work on the microreactor for terrestrial applications. It could provide instant power to hard-to-reach places and quick installation in populated areas.
     John Gehin is the Chief Scientist at the Nuclear Science & Technology Directorate at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). He issued a statement that read “In some areas of the world, reliance on diesel fuel is untenable, and solar and wind power are either unavailable or impractical. Clean, safe nuclear microreactors are emerging as the best alternative for these environments. Unlike diesel generators, it doesn’t require frequent fuel deliveries, since the fuel in the portable microreactor can last more than four years.”
     Battelle Energy Alliance is the contractor that manages operations at the INL. They are collaborating with Radiant on the microreactor project.
     Home generators emit more pollutants that trucks and industry combined. They also pose a more significant risk to human health. This is because they are located in or near a home and run for long periods. Engineers and startups are searching for low-cost, portable solutions to replace current home generators. Possibilities include solar-powered batteries being used in Nigeria, microgrids in a box, or hybrid solutions that could maintain local power during grid outages.
     Radiant’s portable microreactor could provide a clean solution to a range of power challenges. The portable microreactor is better for the environment without compromising on performance. In addition, it is small enough to fit in a shipping container.
      The microreactor could be deployed to remote regions where fossil-fuel generators would ordinarily be employed. Unlike diesel generators, it does not require frequent fuel deliveries. The fuel in a portable microreactor can last more than four years.
      Doug Bernauer is the co-founder of Radiant. He recently said, “The nuclear industry can benefit greatly from aerospace technologies and software developments that have occurred over the past 20 years, and have not made their way into nuclear.”
      Bernauer was researching energy sources for a possible Martian colony when he realized that there was a need for the same kind of flexible, economical power source right here on Earth. He was motivated to team up with two other former SpaceX engineers and co-found Radiant.
    The Radiant portable microreactor will produce over one megawatt. This would be enough electricity to power about one thousand homes for up to eight years. A group of microreactors could power a small town. The microreactors use an improved fuel that can withstand higher temperatures than most nuclear fuels and does not melt which allows for safer operation.
     Radiant is among many public and private organizations that are working on compact nuclear reactors. However, to date, none have been able to develop a truly compact, economical and long-lasting portable microreactor.