What, if any, would be the consequences of using antimatter for the creation of energy?

Question

I don't know how many are familiar with this, but antimatter is no longer just science fiction. It is indeed a real product of circumstantial lab tests. For the fact that anti-matter is the complete opposite charge of matter as we know it, meaning the negative charge is in the nucleus, it produces an effect of pure energy. It was once believed it was impossible to have a 100% efficiency rate, but anti-matter has torn down that theory, for it is perfectly efficient. The only questions, however: what is the downside to using antimatter? Will it be harmful to our planet? Will it be a controllable source?

Answer 1

The main consequence of using antimatter to produce energy would be a gigantic increase in energy costs. There is no available natural source of antimatter, so it is made in the lab in huge machines at enormous cost. Millions of particles - even atoms - of antimatter have been made at CERN in Switzerland, but bear in mind that it takes 6.02 x 10^23 atoms to make 1gram of hydrogen........

The other problem with antimatter is that we have no place to store it, as it cannot be allowed to come into contact with normal matter.....

An excellent and not too technical discussion in Q & A format can be found at:

http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/Spot...

Answer 2

Well you answered your own question.  Its a product of circumstantial lab tests.  So we don't know what the consequences of anti matter will be.  We know its there and we mathematically know how it behaves.  Still we don't know what would happen if we where actually able to produce it.  We don't really know how interact with regular matter.  If in science things want to even themselves out, what happens if matter and anti matter com into contact?

Answer 3

Just read Angels and Demons again

EDIT: HEY! who thumbed me down? The book Angels and Demons by Dan Brown is exactly about this.

Answer 4

You are assuming a lot of things. Antimatter has been produced in only in very small batches, only a few atoms. And at a tremendous cost in energy.

But "you don't get something for nothing". Even if techniques were developed for making antimatter in quantity, and scientists have not a glimmer of how to do this, it would cost much more to make it than you could get in consuming it.

Also, remember when matter and antimatter combine, there is a LOT of radiation released, so it would be a less effective solution than nuclear power plants.

Answer 5

If you watched the Universe this past week as I did, you would know that anti-matter and mater destroy each other on contact.  If a teaspoon of anti-matter will light San Francisco for an entire week, it might be worth it to learn how to capture it for energy.

Answer 6

no free lunch.

if you combine antimatter with matter, you get energy released.

if you create antimatter from matter, it requires a tremendous amount of energy input.  

The balance is, unless you have a "free" source of antimatter, you will use as much energy to create it as you will get when you destroy it.