quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Fusion is not within our reach. Fusion that puts out more energy than is put into it may never be possible, 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Yeah, I guess I'm being pedantic a bit.
Controlled fusion reactors suitable for electrical power plants are out of our reach right now.
We have had man-made fusion since 1952 since they detonated the first fusion bombs.

Fusion doesn't violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics but exploits the mass defect in atomic structure.

Put simply, put a proton and a proton together to make a helium nucleus; the helium nucleus weighs less than two protons and the rest is released as energy.

Mass defect is what drives energy release with fission as well. A Uranium atom has more mass than a Cesium plus a Rubidium so splitting Uranium releases energy.

Fusion power is more advantageous as the mass defect is greater between hydrogen and helium than between Uranium vs Cesium & Rubidium.

More detailed explanation at:
http://nsb.wikidot.com/pl-9-8-3-9

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

FR

All this arguing over coal, oil, nuclear, solar, wind, etc. seems completely pointless to me. I find it hard to believe I'm the only person here who's heard of things like ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) and understands the implications for energy production and slowing environmental damage. And yet, nobody ever talks about it.

Why do we continue to waste money propping up DOA industries like solar and wind when fusion is within our reach?

I just don't get it.

Fusion is not within our reach. Fusion that puts out more energy than is put into it may never be possible, 2nd law of thermodynamics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

FR

All this arguing over coal, oil, nuclear, solar, wind, etc. seems completely pointless to me. I find it hard to believe I'm the only person here who's heard of things like ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) and understands the implications for energy production and slowing environmental damage. And yet, nobody ever talks about it.

Why do we continue to waste money propping up DOA industries like solar and wind when fusion is within our reach?

I just don't get it.

Fusion is not within our reach. Fusion that puts out more energy than is put into it may never be possible, 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Why am I not surprised.

2nd law of thermodynamics says absolutely *nothing* about nuclear fusion being possible. We face technological constraints, nothing more nothing less.

The very fact that we have elements such as helium, lithium, boron... iron (etc) is proof that entropy of the system decreased; which is why these elements are in fact formed in fusion reactions.

Fundamentally, our current issues are (more or less):

Energy inefficiency of the laser pumps pushing the reaction (about 1%).
Difficulty of creating the magnetic bottles.
Efficiency of energy collection from plasma.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

FR

All this arguing over coal, oil, nuclear, solar, wind, etc. seems completely pointless to me. I find it hard to believe I'm the only person here who's heard of things like ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) and understands the implications for energy production and slowing environmental damage. And yet, nobody ever talks about it.

Why do we continue to waste money propping up DOA industries like solar and wind when fusion is within our reach?

I just don't get it.

Fusion is not within our reach. Fusion that puts out more energy than is put into it may never be possible, 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Why am I not surprised.

2nd law of thermodynamics says absolutely *nothing* about nuclear fusion being possible. We face technological constraints, nothing more nothing less.

The very fact that we have elements such as helium, lithium, boron... iron (etc) is proof that entropy of the system decreased; which is why these elements are in fact formed in fusion reactions.

Fundamentally, our current issues are (more or less):

Energy inefficiency of the laser pumps pushing the reaction (about 1%).
Difficulty of creating the magnetic bottles.
Efficiency of energy collection from plasma.

The tragedy of the universe is that eventually the cycle of suns forming and dying will come to an end because it is not an entropy free cycle. The cycle does lose energy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

FR

All this arguing over coal, oil, nuclear, solar, wind, etc. seems completely pointless to me. I find it hard to believe I'm the only person here who's heard of things like ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) and understands the implications for energy production and slowing environmental damage. And yet, nobody ever talks about it.

Why do we continue to waste money propping up DOA industries like solar and wind when fusion is within our reach?

I just don't get it.

Fusion is not within our reach. Fusion that puts out more energy than is put into it may never be possible, 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Why am I not surprised.

2nd law of thermodynamics says absolutely *nothing* about nuclear fusion being possible. We face technological constraints, nothing more nothing less.

The very fact that we have elements such as helium, lithium, boron... iron (etc) is proof that entropy of the system decreased; which is why these elements are in fact formed in fusion reactions.

Fundamentally, our current issues are (more or less):

Energy inefficiency of the laser pumps pushing the reaction (about 1%).
Difficulty of creating the magnetic bottles.
Efficiency of energy collection from plasma.

The tragedy of the universe is that eventually the cycle of suns forming and dying will come to an end because it is not an entropy free cycle. The cycle does lose energy.

Which, while true, has nothing to do with your contention that we may never be able to have fusion power due to the second law of thermodynamics. Said statement is, as I said before, wrong.

We may never have fusion, although I think we will. But if we don't it will be economic, political, and technological impediments that prevent it. The second law of thermodynamics will have nothing to do with it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

FR

All this arguing over coal, oil, nuclear, solar, wind, etc. seems completely pointless to me. I find it hard to believe I'm the only person here who's heard of things like ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) and understands the implications for energy production and slowing environmental damage. And yet, nobody ever talks about it.

Why do we continue to waste money propping up DOA industries like solar and wind when fusion is within our reach?

I just don't get it.

Fusion is not within our reach. Fusion that puts out more energy than is put into it may never be possible, 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Why am I not surprised.

2nd law of thermodynamics says absolutely *nothing* about nuclear fusion being possible. We face technological constraints, nothing more nothing less.

The very fact that we have elements such as helium, lithium, boron... iron (etc) is proof that entropy of the system decreased; which is why these elements are in fact formed in fusion reactions.

Fundamentally, our current issues are (more or less):

Energy inefficiency of the laser pumps pushing the reaction (about 1%).
Difficulty of creating the magnetic bottles.
Efficiency of energy collection from plasma.

The tragedy of the universe is that eventually the cycle of suns forming and dying will come to an end because it is not an entropy free cycle. The cycle does lose energy.

Which, while true, has nothing to do with your contention that we may never be able to have fusion power due to the second law of thermodynamics. Said statement is, as I said before, wrong.

We may never have fusion, although I think we will. But if we don't it will be economic, political, and technological impediments that prevent it. The second law of thermodynamics will have nothing to do with it.

Wait, you think the 2nd law isn't entropy? WTF do you think the 2nd law is? How precisely would it not apply?

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Fusion is not within our reach. Fusion that puts out more energy than is put into it may never be possible, 2nd law of thermodynamics.

I realize that too. But I don't imagine they're doing this on a whim. I expect someone has the math that shows it's possible or they wouldn't be trying. After all, I believe a Russian mathematician recently modified E=MC(sq) as well.

quote:


There are more problems than just the local government not letting them use fire trucks to cool the plants. The plants physical design is a disaster waiting to happen. The spent fuel rod pools are on top of the reactor vessels which makes it next to impossible to remove them now that the reactor vessels have breached.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

FR

All this arguing over coal, oil, nuclear, solar, wind, etc. seems completely pointless to me. I find it hard to believe I'm the only person here who's heard of things like ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) and understands the implications for energy production and slowing environmental damage. And yet, nobody ever talks about it.

Why do we continue to waste money propping up DOA industries like solar and wind when fusion is within our reach?

I just don't get it.

Fusion is not within our reach. Fusion that puts out more energy than is put into it may never be possible, 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Why am I not surprised.

2nd law of thermodynamics says absolutely *nothing* about nuclear fusion being possible. We face technological constraints, nothing more nothing less.

The very fact that we have elements such as helium, lithium, boron... iron (etc) is proof that entropy of the system decreased; which is why these elements are in fact formed in fusion reactions.

Fundamentally, our current issues are (more or less):

Energy inefficiency of the laser pumps pushing the reaction (about 1%).
Difficulty of creating the magnetic bottles.
Efficiency of energy collection from plasma.

The tragedy of the universe is that eventually the cycle of suns forming and dying will come to an end because it is not an entropy free cycle. The cycle does lose energy.

Which, while true, has nothing to do with your contention that we may never be able to have fusion power due to the second law of thermodynamics. Said statement is, as I said before, wrong.

We may never have fusion, although I think we will. But if we don't it will be economic, political, and technological impediments that prevent it. The second law of thermodynamics will have nothing to do with it.

Wait, you think the 2nd law isn't entropy? WTF do you think the 2nd law is? How precisely would it not apply?

Do you see me saying that the second law doesn't regard entropy?
In fact, when you made the uneducated opinion that fusion may not be possible because of the second law of thermodynamics I educated you and said that the entropy of the system decreases when the heavier elements were made.

Using small words: The things that stop us from getting fusion power are economic, political, and technological. You really do hate admitting you are just wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
As an aside, having spent fuel storage at the same level is a good idea. The few plants that have spent fuel storage at a level different level than the top of the reactor are a rube goldberg nightmare during refueling.

In a BWR6 design (like Fukushima) spent fuel storage and reactor vessel access are at the same level, the highest level in the building. After several foot thick concrete missile shields are removed, you can get to the bolts holding the reactor vessel head closed. After bolts are removed, the space is flooded up to the same level as the spent fuel pool and the head and top equipment is removed and a weir gate to the spent fuel pool is removed.. Then fuel is lifted with remote operating tools and trundled to the fuel pool.

In a PWR, the fuel goes through a transfer tube to a fuel pool outside of the containment building but at the same level as the reactor cavity so you don't have to use valving on the transfer tubes (in most reactors.. some exceptions have very convoluted refueling paths)

Getting to the spent fuel at Fukushima isn't so much an issue because being at the top of reactor height but because the lack of cooling water allowed the fuel in the spent fuel pool to boil. The whole level of the building would be contaminated to hell and gone. You have to deal with nuclides in the people space that are normally only found in the pipes.

Tepco did a lot of benchmarking of the TMI cleanup and the DOE cleanup jobs on the old bomb factory reactors.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
First ignore the current majority held scientific belief that humans are responsible for all of it.

quote:

The same is true about cleaning up rivers, lakes and oceans. Clean water is better than polluted water.

quote:


It may have made refueling easy but has now created an environmental catastrophe that may never get fully cleaned up. Not a trade off I find acceptable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:


It may have made refueling easy but has now created an environmental catastrophe that may never get fully cleaned up. Not a trade off I find acceptable.

Location of a spent fuel pool is totally irrelevant to the cleanup situation. More like harping on the type of radio in a car that was wrecked.

The problems at Fukushima stem from a loss of cooling for a protracted amount of time. The design flaw that caused this was considering the placing of equipment and environmental hardening was sufficient for location on a seacoast where devastating tsunamis could happen.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Marc, all your points are true. I am just trying to approach the situation from a different angle. I believe that humanity has had some impact on climate change, but to blame humanity for all of it is a bit of a stretch.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Actually you cant get more energy from something than you put in.
In nuclear fusion, we are talking about a self sustaining reaction. In other words, we are just putting fuel into the system in the form of hydrogen, and the reaction is generating thermal energy that we can convert to electricity.
That is what is meant by efficiency.
If you have to keep firing lasers or whatever you used to generate the initial reaction, then it is not efficient and a waste.
Internal combustion, fossil fuel power plants even nuclear fission are inefficient.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Internal combustion, fossil fuel power plants even nuclear fission are inefficient.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

You don't get it do you, how precisely can you get more energy out of a fusion reaction than you put into it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
When we do fusion it always takes more energy than we get out. That is a plain fact.

quote:

That's cold fusion and I've done the math on that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
When we do fusion it always takes more energy than we get out. That is a plain fact.

Seems to work for the stars.

quote:

quote:

That's cold fusion and I've done the math on that.

What pretentious bullshit. How long have you been an astrophysicist now?

Granted, cold fusion seems a dead end -- for now. Science has a way of learning new things.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Stars die. They consume all their fuel and die. Their is no such thing as infinite energy..