Author Topic: Fusion reactors - as dangerous as fission reactors?  (Read 13513 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline captain-custard

  • previously known as andicirk
  • 210
  • one sandwich short of a picnic
Re: Fusion reactors - as dangerous as fission reactors?
the whole issue for energy is going to stay stuck until we work on the main problem , the demand , we can build eco energy stations , nuclear non nuclear , green etc but if we don't change how we live ,how we use energy then we are always going to be fighting a loosing battle.

we need to look at the fundamentals of our design of houses and how we heat and light these areas this is as much an architects problem as a nuclear physicians,

why do we promote eco lightbulbs and still sell the old ones , we need to grow up and just use less......


personal choice comes with personal responsabilities


"Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together."

 
Re: Fusion reactors - as dangerous as fission reactors?
Thanks for the response Mars,
I'll get some linked information and detail where I specifically got these ideas floating around in my head tonight.
The 30 billion dollar income figure I got from some article about a year ago that astonished me as well.
It will take some time to find, but I'll do the research for proof after work.

The Hydrogen pumping systems are from a company working in the Netherlands on their Hydrogen super highway from one end of the country to the other. I beleive they were $30,000 and there were some volume concerns with them. I'll definately get that info as well tonight.

 

Offline MarkN

  • 26
Re: Fusion reactors - as dangerous as fission reactors?
Hydrogen has a major issue with use in that the hydrogen fuel cell, the only currently planned use of it, is very difficult to build (and requires a protonic membrane for the best use, and the company which own that technology are not selling the rights). Thoretically, it isn't that much more diffuicult to generate methane, which could be used in more conventional engines (most importantly gas turbines/jet engines) as well as possibly in simpler fuel cells. this currently seems to be the way the industry is going at the moment, although I think a liquid fuel such as mathanol or ethanol would be more practical for storage, especially in vehicles. the real probalem with this style of system is that it doesn't produce any power, and it extremely inefficient as well, and while this may not be an issue with nuclear power, with renewables it most certainly is.

As for using less power, my flat seems to be doing well. It has been raining for most of the day, there is no heating on (not even the water heater), it's 8:30 pm, and I still have the door open to keep the temperature down to a reasonable level. There again, it was only built a year ago..

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: Fusion reactors - as dangerous as fission reactors?
Quote
To be fair, it's really not a scientist's problem anymore so much as it is an engineer's.

Not actually. I think it's an applied research problem, and there is a lot of physicists in applied research field, though you have never heard of them. In my list it would turn to engineering problem when they have verified the first prototype and noted that it is working.

Mika
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Re: Fusion reactors - as dangerous as fission reactors?
Not actually. I think it's an applied research problem, and there is a lot of physicists in applied research field, though you have never heard of them. In my list it would turn to engineering problem when they have verified the first prototype and noted that it is working.

Insofar as I know, we have built working fusion reactors, but we've not managed to break even in terms of energy input vs. energy output.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: Fusion reactors - as dangerous as fission reactors?
Quote
Insofar as I know, we have built working fusion reactors, but we've not managed to break even in terms of energy input vs. energy output.

I should have phrased the earlier little bit better, but as long as you don't produce surplus you don't have a working prototype of a power plant. As long as that doesn't happen there is bound to be physicists around. It could be that the fusion on ground level is impossible for some reason not known at the moment (though quite unlikely).

Mika
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 

Offline Kosh

  • A year behind what's funny
  • 210
Re: Fusion reactors - as dangerous as fission reactors?
Not actually. I think it's an applied research problem, and there is a lot of physicists in applied research field, though you have never heard of them. In my list it would turn to engineering problem when they have verified the first prototype and noted that it is working.



IIRC JET was able to for a couple of seconds. The ITER utilizes many advances in plasma control and superconducting technologies and theories, many of which are being tested in China
Insofar as I know, we have built working fusion reactors, but we've not managed to break even in terms of energy input vs. energy output.
"The reason for this is that the original Fortran got so convoluted and extensive (10's of millions of lines of code) that no-one can actually figure out how it works, there's a massive project going on to decode the original Fortran and write a more modern system, but until then, the UK communication network is actually relying heavily on 35 year old Fortran that nobody understands." - Flipside

Brain I/O error
Replace and press any key