What are disadvantages of nuclear fusion?

[Winter Man]

I prefer to run it at 50/60Hz and convert that to mains voltage already

EDIT: I'm wondering. If alt fusion tech like this succeeds to generate net energy first than ITER, what will happen to ITER? Do they will continue the research or not?

It's a DC output, it'd need to go through some manner of smoothing and alternating before transmission anyway so they could be run at any frequency, really. The output is more like a square wave with the trough at 0V than a sine wave centred on it, basically. As for ITER, chances are it'd take a back seat but still be a really useful science experiment.

[Idobox]

It's a DC output, it'd need to go through some manner of smoothing and alternating before transmission anyway so they could be run at any frequency, really. The output is more like a square wave with the trough at 0V than a sine wave centred on it, basically. As for ITER, chances are it'd take a back seat but still be a really useful science experiment.

Are you sure they have direct conversion? I thought the plan was to use a heat machine.

[phoenix_ca]

Are you sure they have direct conversion? I thought the plan was to use a heat machine.

Direct Current.

And as for the Focus Fusion guys, the plan isn't to use heat at all, but to use the stream of charged He-4 to induce a current in a solenoid around it.

[Nuke]

i think polywells with direct conversion would run steady state only needing dc-dc converter between the output and the input (for the coils at least, electron and ion guns would need their own power supplies). dc-dc converters usually have efficiencies higher than 90%. im assuming confinement is the lions share of the power requirements here.

crude heat machines are for tokamak people.

[Aghanim]

Agreed. Tokamak needs steam turbine because most of the fusion energy is lost in neutrons

[NFUN]

Given 'they' are the persons preventing people having fusion reactors in their cars, I'm going to guess it's 'everybody with the slightest lick of sense'.

Fusion powered cars would be horrible. Any crash would end up in a giant explosion that kills any people, super mutants or giant ants near it.

[peadar1987]

i think polywells with direct conversion would run steady state only needing dc-dc converter between the output and the input (for the coils at least, electron and ion guns would need their own power supplies). dc-dc converters usually have efficiencies higher than 90%. im assuming confinement is the lions share of the power requirements here.

crude heat machines are for tokamak people.

Oi! Nothing crude about a heat engine! They're complicated enough for me to get a 4-year PhD out of researching them anyway!

[KerikBalm]

i think polywells with direct conversion would run steady state only needing dc-dc converter between the output and the input (for the coils at least, electron and ion guns would need their own power supplies). dc-dc converters usually have efficiencies higher than 90%. im assuming confinement is the lions share of the power requirements here.

crude heat machines are for tokamak people.

Dense plasma focuses could also have a large portion of the enrgy captured by direct conversion

[Winter Man]

Direct Current.

And as for the Focus Fusion guys, the plan isn't to use heat at all, but to use the stream of charged He-4 to induce a current in a solenoid around it.

We were talking about focus. Direct conversion and direct current. The wires are getting a little crossed I think.

[Nuke]

Oi! Nothing crude about a heat engine! They're complicated enough for me to get a 4-year PhD out of researching them anyway!

even in a direct conversion reactor you still have heat to deal with. coolant needs to go through heat exchangers. its not your primary energy source, but you might as well recover what energy you can. perhaps you can run it into a molten salt heat storage tank, so you can use it to restart the reactor should it decide to stop reacting, rather than drawing power for ignition from the grid.

it was less making fun of thermodynamicists and more taking a jab at tokamak proponents.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Nuke

[WinkAllKerb'']

mururoa, sahara, area 51, hiroshima, nagasaki, tchernobyl, fukushima ... what else ... fallout & godzilla ?

TT

EDIT: nevermind, "the first rocket landed as intended" ... *sick* - a german scientist -

Edited May 24, 2014 by WinkAllKerb''

[SargeRho]

And that has to do with Nuclear Fusion...exactly nothing?

[WinkAllKerb'']

And that has to do with Nuclear Fusion...exactly nothing?

bah tchernobyl worms can answer this better than me ...

[SargeRho]

Tchernobyl was a Nuclear FISSION plant. We are talking about Nuclear FUSION. Completely different processes.

[WinkAllKerb'']

whatever the process you use , it has result *shrug* good, bad, yin yang and tralalala worm unseeable 2d communication is not the kind of thing i care about.

Edit: everything has a cost been many time dare win history proven not the question here too at all ...

First interest of history is someday (let's hope) we might learn something from! (may be the time has come as we start planning sending some no-nation civilian to space) scuse me if i feel tired of Cesar alike football arena sponsored "mass effect" shows ..

it's like trying to learn the old Squad monkey how to grimace ... huhu

Edited May 24, 2014 by WinkAllKerb''

[peadar1987]

whatever the process you use ' date=' it has result *shrug* good, bad, yin yang and tralalala worm unseeable 2d communication is not the kind of thing i care about.

[u']Edit: everything has a cost been many time dare win history proven not the question here too at all ...

First interest of history is someday (let's hope) we might learn something from! (may be the time has come as we start planning sending some no-nation civilian to space) scuse me if i feel tired of Cesar alike football arena sponsored "mass effect" shows ..

it's like trying to learn the old Squad monkey how to grimace ... huhu

What is your first language? I'm genuinely interested in what you're trying to say, but I'm struggling to understand it, I think something might be getting lost in translation.

If it's French, Dutch, or at a stretch, German or Spanish, I can probably make a fair stab at translating it.

Edited May 24, 2014 by peadar1987

[magnemoe]

i think polywells with direct conversion would run steady state only needing dc-dc converter between the output and the input (for the coils at least, electron and ion guns would need their own power supplies). dc-dc converters usually have efficiencies higher than 90%. im assuming confinement is the lions share of the power requirements here.

crude heat machines are for tokamak people.

polywell with normal tritium / helium 3 is a heat engine, with boron you get an charged beam, directly to power or use as a rocket engine.

[magnemoe]

This is a thread about fusion, it assumes it will work.

The scale argument doesn't take into account the fact that microgeneration with fossil fuels still goes on despite the cost. See: pretty much every vehicle. The incredible power density of fusion means it's automatically better suited to small, even portable applications.

The sheer square meterage required for solar or wind pretty much disqualifies its use in densely populated countries like the UK, or Hong Kong.

Depend on size, energy density and maintenance costs. Cars is out, perhaps for ships and trains, if you can make it real small and cheap perhaps an hybrid solution for long haul trucks, fusion power batteries who drive engines.

Fusion has some downsides, hard to avoid at least the inner lining on the reactor become some radioactive because of neutrons.

This is a maintenance issue more than an environmental one, the problem will be larger in smaller engines made to cut costs than large one who focus on efficiency.

[Nuke]

polywell with normal tritium / helium 3 is a heat engine, with boron you get an charged beam, directly to power or use as a rocket engine.

many polywell proponents usually focus on d-d or p-b11 as the optimal fuels for the reactor. the d-d reactor would need a heat engine. robert bussard pointed out in his

that you would initially have a d-d reactor that could just be retrofitted to existing coal fire plants. i dont even consider he3 a valid fuel supply until we have much better space infrastructure (which likely depends on us having fusion). he3 isnt the magic fuel everyone makes it out to be, its just another option among many.

direct conversion reactors are sexy for space applications. you need much less radiator area, which reduces your ship's mass. but i think you are better off with a power reactor running electric engines, because you now have energy for life support, hydroponics, active radiation shielding, centrifuges, and isru while landed. in other words a reusable space bus.

Edited May 25, 2014 by Nuke

[Kruleworld]

Finite doesn't automaticly mean we can spend it all.

Sure hydrogen is finite, but there is so much of it, for practical purposes in this case, it might aswel be infinite

I'm sure the first taps of crude oil said the same thing.

Fusion powered cars would be horrible. Any crash would end up in a giant explosion that kills any people, super mutants or giant ants near it.

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081216220055/fallout/images/3/33/DerelictVehicle03.jpg

Is it worse than driving around with a huge tank full of explosive liquid? Any reactor would have significant radiation shielding that it wouldn't be easy to rupture.

Edited May 25, 2014 by Kruleworld

[SargeRho]

Any car with sufficient radiation shielding would weight tons and tons, because you need a LOT of lead to shield xrays and neutrons.

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, and deuterium is probably the most abundant isotope in the universe.

[Red Iron Crown]

Isn't protium far more common than deuterium?

[SargeRho]

Protium is regular hydrogen. I thought it would be obvious that I am referring to Deuterium as most abundant isotope *after* Protium.

[phoenix_ca]

I'm sure the first taps of crude oil said the same thing.

Except hydrogen really is everywhere. It's practically in everything. The earth is full of it.

Is it worse than driving around with a huge tank full of explosive liquid? Any reactor would have significant radiation shielding that it wouldn't be easy to rupture.

I'd take a guess that NFUN was kidding. At least I hope they were kidding. Fusion reactors don't blow-up. Depending on the type and the fuel being used they could spread some nasty radioactive material if they were violently destroyed, but blowing-up? Not likely. And nuclear fission reactors (which are the ones portrayed in the image) don't explode like that either. Meltdown, sure. Have the reactor housing crack and even violently explode outward because of extreme heat inside (and the subsequent vaporization of water), sure. But not explode in a fireball.

[magnemoe]

Except hydrogen really is everywhere. It's practically in everything. The earth is full of it.

I'd take a guess that NFUN was kidding. At least I hope they were kidding. Fusion reactors don't blow-up. Depending on the type and the fuel being used they could spread some nasty radioactive material if they were violently destroyed, but blowing-up? Not likely. And nuclear fission reactors (which are the ones portrayed in the image) don't explode like that either. Meltdown, sure. Have the reactor housing crack and even violently explode outward because of extreme heat inside (and the subsequent vaporization of water), sure. But not explode in a fireball.

He was joking, why else use a fallout screenshot.

And yes the cars in Fallout 3 was lots of fun, for even more fun dump a pile of junk on top of them. One place they even had a long queue of cars blow up the first and they all go of.

As for running out of hydrogen, even tritium, not an issue. heat pollution will be an larger problem.