Are you afraid of the nuclear fusion?

Question

fusion in Iter project.

Answer 1

in itself? no but I wouldn't be quick to trust the workers in charge.

Answer 2

and they still have to clean up the beaches near Dounreay...

That's okay as long as single men with no family and contacts do not run out and concrete of course.  There's still plenty of room in the ocean for them.

Answer 3

An interesting question.

At first my answer was "no, why should I be".  But then I started to think about it more.  

In basic terms, nuclear fusion copies the reaction that happens in stars, including our Sun.  Atoms move so fast, that when they collide, they join to form heavier atoms and, in the process of fusing together, release energy.  But in theory, there is little dangerous waste.

In Nuclear fission, atoms don't move quite so fast, so that when they collide they break apart, releasing energy as they do so.  The problem is, the residual material is very radioactive.

Based on the aftermath of the reaction alone, fusion is a lot less scary than fission, because of all the radioactive waste that must be contained following a fission reaction.  But, in order to generate a fusion reaction, the amount of energy and heat is very scary.  In fact, the heat required means that the reaction cannot be contained in a physical container (which would melt), but must be suspended in an electro-magnetic field.  The energy input required for all this is greater than the output produced by the reaction.

Contrary to one answer, there are a handful of fusion reactors in the world (including JET at Culham, in the UK and the new ITER project in France). for research purposes, but none of them has produced more energy than is put in to make the reaction and are therefore unsustainable.

Fusion is scary, but if it were to be successful i.e. produce more energy than is put in, it would, potentially solve the worlds energy problem and is, therefore, worth pursuing.

Answer 4

Bring it on.

Endless cheap power.

Answer 5

Not at all.

Answer 6

hard to be afraid of something we owe our entire existence to and thankfully our star has several billion years of reaction left in it, only when this runs out will we need to look for a similar planet

Answer 7

Nope.  For starters, they haven't produced a fusion reactor yet.  Secondly, nuclear fusion is the wave of the future for the production of electrical power -- it's clean, safe, and can use just about anything for fuel (hey, we could power fusion reactors with used motor oil, old tires, and toxic waste!)

Are you referring to nuclear FISSION?  Fission reactors have more hazards associated with them, but as long as the proper safeguards are employed they're fine.  Too bad a certain political party who seems h**l-bent on keeping the U.S. dependent on foreign oil has blocked all efforts to build fission reactors to generate electricity.  Heck, even the French (who are much more environmentally conscious than Americans) allowed the development of fission reactors, and now they're Europe's largest exporter of electricity...

Answer 8

no, and even if it explode it does less harm than or compared to nuclear power plants. it's an innovative approach to modern science and technological developments in energy.

Answer 9

My understanding is that fusion is not as potentially pollutive as fission, but that it is very hard to sustain the reaction, and     that containment is as issue. I doubt we are anywhere near solving the probblems, but I would welcome the science.

On the other hand, I don't think it is the real answer to the energy problem.

Certainly a fusion reactor may generate a lot of energy, but generating energy from megasources does not see as good a solution as a localized grid, where many smaller faclities derive energy that doesn't have to ber transmitted long distances.

The problem with energy produces by high profile surces (reactors, hydroelectric... etc.) is that a great deal of energy is lost in transmission.

I honestlyy believe the right answer is for energy to be produced  by the best possible source for every locale.

Coastal towns then can tap tidal power and wind power.

Piedmont can use hydro, wind dry bed geothermal... and so on.

Then a lot of energy isn't being wasted in the transmission process.

Answer 10

Not really

.. .. ..

The worst that can happen is it will burn a hole threw the earth

"to the other side" Kinds of Like that Steppenwolf song said "On the other side" or something like that

.. .. ..

Answer 11

By nuclear fusion do you mean the ability to harnest energy from the fusion? In that case no, if nuclear fusion is successful then everyone can have anything.. No more LEDC's.