Is it conceivable that nuclear energy could be extracted from mundane crystals by aiming a neutron beam right at each nucleus of the crystal?

Answer 1

Original answer

No, it isn't conceivable to obtain nuclear energy from crystals (or anything else that is "mundane") by bombarding them with neutrons. At least not for fuel for power generation. All you will succeed in doing is getting the nuclei of the atoms of the materials to absorb some of the neutrons, and this will make the nuclei unstable. When we get materials to absorb neutrons, we call that activation. And if we activate something, it almost always becomes radioactive. Let's look at that for a second. Jump with me.

We take a specific amount of natural cobalt (59Co) in the form of a metal slug and drop it into an operating reactor via a special port. Then the 59Co sits in the neutron bath and absorbs a neutron (it becomes activated) to become 60Co. 60Co is highly radioactive, but we did this on purpose. We now extract the little slug of 60Co and park it inside a lead casket with a special door on it. The 60Co has now become what is called a source. It is radioactive like a big dog and will zap the heck out of whatever it is exposed to. We now drag this special rig out to a big job site where steel is being welded together and use the source to x-ray welds. We park film on one side of the pipe or whatever and park our source on the other side. Then we open the door by remote control. After we wait a short while, we then shut the door and recover and develop our film. This is convenient since we don't have to try to drag an x-ray machine out there. It's a useful thing like that. But it's nasty. Radioactive nasty. And it ain't fuel or an energy source for obtaining needed power. Back to the topic.

If we activate "mundane" stuff willy nilly, all we end up with is a bunch of radioactive stuff. We can activate things and make them into fuel. We make plutonium for fuel (or bombs) by activation. But making fuel by activating "mundane" stuff ain't happenin' round these parts, partner. So we don't try.

Additional Information

Yes. But not just any "mundane" crystal. Nor simply because it is a crystal. And not by aiming a beam at the nucleus (which is not technically feasable).

There is a type of reactor called and Accelerator Driven System (ADS) or Energy Amplifier (EA), which was invented by Carlo Rubbia, who is a Nobel Prize winner and was the head of CERN at one point. The technology has been tested in a variety of ways, but a plant using it has yet to be built. There are various projects underway throughout the world to do this, notably in Norway.

The way an EA works is this: A proton accelerator aims a beam of protons at a spallation target. This target can be made of any of a number of the heavier elements, but lead is a good material for use. When a fast-moving proton collides with a lead nucleus, a cascade of neutrons comes off. These are rather energetic.

The neutrons move through a bath of fuel. Thorium-232 dissolved in lead is a good possibility for this, though high-level nuclear waste is another possibility.

If a neutron of correct velocity collides with the nucleus of a thorium-232 atom, it will be captured to produce uranium-233, undergoes fission (almost immediately in the neutron rich environment) to produce heat and any of various fission products.

There are a number of other things that are interesting gooin on here. When a neutron collides with the nucleus of an atom, it can really cause any of three things to happen. It can impart some of its energy to the atom, heating the atom, with the neutron losing energy and going off to collide with something else. It can be captured by the atom, producing a different isotope of the same element. It can cause the atom to undergo decay by any of a number of decay types. The more unstable the atom is, the more likely it is that a collision will cause decay. The net effect of this is that radioactive isotopes are reduced in such a situation, through their decay chains, much faster than would happen in nature.

The EA promises to be a much safer way of getting power than conventional power plants, being incapable of a meltdown and incapable of being used to make nuclear bombs. It is expected to cost about 10% as much to build, for a given output. It should be able to use thorium, which we have a several millennia supply of, or nuclear waste for power. It should leave nearly no waste of its own, and what it does leave should be reduced to safe levels within five hundred years.