4,427
edits
Nuclear fusion: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Fusion as an energy option
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
Fusion undoubtedly offers some important advantages. Once operative, energy supply would be virtually limitless; greenhouse gas exhaust would be zero; nuclear waste would be reduced (with respect to fission), and nuclear proliferation problems would be small or inexistant. On the other hand, there are complications due to the very complex technology required and the radioactive activation of the reactor vessel components. | Fusion undoubtedly offers some important advantages. Once operative, energy supply would be virtually limitless; greenhouse gas exhaust would be zero; nuclear waste would be reduced (with respect to fission), and nuclear proliferation problems would be small or inexistant. On the other hand, there are complications due to the very complex technology required and the radioactive activation of the reactor vessel components. | ||
A significant part of the latter complications are due to the projected use of D-T fuels (deuterium-tritium) in the first-generation fusion power plants, which is the fuel that is easiest to ignite, but which leads to intense neutron radiation. One may speculate that, if succesful, a second generation of fusion power plants can be developed that runs on aneutronic fuels (such as D-D), leading to a strong reduction of the problems associated with radioactivity. | |||
As compared to other energy options, fusion has an additional complication due to the fact that its implementation is not immediate, and that its eventual implementation is subject to the solution of a number of technical problems. The current consensus it that while the technical challenges are formidable, they can be overcome. Thus, the main discussion regarding fusion as an energy option is not about its technical feasibility, but about the timescales for implementation. | As compared to other energy options, fusion has an additional complication due to the fact that its implementation is not immediate, and that its eventual implementation is subject to the solution of a number of technical problems. The current consensus it that while the technical challenges are formidable, they can be overcome. Thus, the main discussion regarding fusion as an energy option is not about its technical feasibility, but about the timescales for implementation. | ||