Is controlled nuclear fusion for power really going to happen?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/jan/29/nuclear-fusion-power-iter-funding
Soon(ish) that is.

Related Items

8 Responses to “Is controlled nuclear fusion for power really going to happen?”

  1. Percy said:

    yes

  2. Villhelm said:

    Yes, they predict something like ~50 years until widespread commercialisation, assuming that things go basically as planned and they can scale up the reactors to the size they need and still retain the same basic operating principles.

    On the article:

    “by recreating the conditions inside the sun”

    Not strictly so, recreating the conditions inside the sun would need about a ten-fold drop in temperature and instead of using a very low pressure, vapourous mix of plasma, the reactor would need to have incredibly dense plasma and it would also need to be contained by it’s own gravity, rather than incredibly complex magnetic fields and constantly ignited by a laser shooting fuel pellets 😛

    But that’s pedantry.

  3. . said:

    No!!!!!

    Assuming the laser pinch fusion design reaches break even then it will require a vast amount of tritium and deuterium pellets, which are difficult and slow to manufacture. If (?) the torus designs’, of fusion reactors, break even then they too will require a fuel supply infra structure.

    According to a recent Scientific American article, the infra-structure for a fusion generator will prove to be impossible because of the amount of fuel required (tritium and deuterium) greatly exceeding any foreseeable world-wide manufacturing capability!

  4. Kes said:

    Never say never.

  5. warrior said:

    Ask Einstein…

  6. vadaptre said:

    IDK..OK take 3T2+2D1>4He2+1n0..mass diff=3.31E-29Kg..E=mc^2=3E-12J
    thats abt 3.6E14J per Kg of reactants (far better than coal/oil)..great..enuff 2 solve all worlds energy probs
    ..trouble is u gotta heat these isotopes up 2 abt 10^8K for Ek to overcome coul barrier and enter the ‘strong force fusion zone’. Also the only way to contain the plasma of D’s &T’s is by various magfield configs (more input energy)
    The toroidal config wif mag lines interlacing the toroid hoop at rt angles looks OK..but remember its gotta hold the plasma from contact with the rest of the machinery, at least for a length of time such that ur rate of fusion energy production exceeds the rate of energy input to heat the plasma and maintain the mag fields etc.
    I wud conject that neither the toirod or mag mirror design with a static field will do it. U need a constantly varying B-field which adapts to the instability of the plasma (sure aint in thermodynamic equilib!) @ incredibly fast rates..poss using neg feedback control via a supercomputer. Good luck!

  7. Master said:

    ITER’s toroidal confinement will hardly satisfy the necessary requirements to harness fusion power. Hence, I think, the most promising would be the electrostatic fusion devices such as the aneutronic nuclear fusion reactor.

  8. Lugo T said:

    The Russians controlled their Soviet block empire substantially by controlling the oil and gas supplies to their Soviet block allies. I’m allowed to say that.

    US does likewise, hence it’s desire to control as much oil and pipelines as it can.

    US cannot control sea water – fuel for fusion reactors.

    Ergo its satellites will not be allowed to develop fusion reactors. Hence the propaganda. Incidentally it used to be 20 years, now they’ve suddenly extended it to 50 before it gets developed.

    It is possible, it depends on how much money you spend on development and on whether you allow the US to sabotage the project.




Message:

[newtagclound int=0]

Subscribe

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Archives