What are the pros and cons of nuclear fussion?

Question

THANKS for helping me. Me and a friend got into a headted debate about this one.

Answer 1

Whether you're talking about bombs or energy production makes a big difference. Seeing as others are talking about the latter, I'll refer to the former:

A thermonuclear bomb uses fusion *in addition* to fission. A traditional fission reaction is launched with unstable plutonium or uranium, then the heat produced causes a secondary fusion reaction. Normally hydrogen is used, and the extreme heat causes the hydrogen atoms to fuse together and release many times more energy than a fission reaction can produce.

Hence, the pro of a fusion (thermonuclear) bomb is that it produces a lot more energy than a fission one.

Answer 2

pros are a lot of cheap energy

cons  no way to contain it.

Answer 3

Pro: Boil water without smoke.

Con: Create waste that lasts 'forever'.

Verdict? Boil water with parabolic arrays i.e. solar

edit: fission/fusion... boy am I an idiot, I thought I knew the difference

Answer 4

Fusion or Fission. big difference. look online.

Fusion uses plasma and fission uses crashing molecules. dont know too much about it but

Fusion-

Fusion uses a reactor to take a derivative of water and fuse it with Hydrogen. This makes Helium and energy.

Pros are there can be no type of meltdown. If something goes wrong the plasma will stop as soon as it hits the side of the reactor. It creates natural energy that cannot harm the environment because the be product is helium. Cons are it is still in research phases and not for commercial use.

Fission- Pros. renewable energy source.

cons very expensive. quite dangerous. produces radioactive waste.

( i have no authority whatsoever on this topic. These are just things i have picked up in my random quests for knowledge. yea i know im a geek)

Answer 5

Pros: Creates a lot of energy with very little fuel and not much waste.

Cons: It's never been accomplished in a way that creates more energy than is needed to accomplish it. E.G. It's not ready yet.

Answer 6

Great source of power - pro

The nuclear waste such as the spent fuel rods take a long time to degrade and storing them till the degrade is problematic. - con

A problem at the power plant can lead to widespread destruction and unusable land for hundreds of years. - con

Answer 7

I'm too lazy to look it up, but fusion is putting the atoms together, not splitting them apart (which is fission) isn't it?

Pros

Nuclear energy

Nuclear weapons (Hydrogen bombs to be exact... the most powerful weapons ever created)

Cons

Need to build safe storage spots for waste

Expensive to make and upkeep

Nuclear weapons

Possible terrorist target, possible meltdown

Basically, I think we would be better off without fusion (or fission), but it's here to stay, and there are some marked benefits.

Answer 8

pros - very small chance of meltdown, produces alot less radiactice waste than fission, releases more energy than fission, almost unlimited fuel (it can run on heavy water, we have lots of it), by products from reaction are useful ie heliem

cons - still in reserch phase, new test reactor being built in france at the moment

correction to other answer, the JET reactor in england puts out the same energy as it uses, very close to commercial use