1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Fusion Nuclear Reactor to get the Green Light

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Ricochet J, 25 May 2006.

  1. Ricochet J


    Joined: 29 Jun 2004

    Posts: 12,888

    Source BBC News

    Guess that British guy who hacked into NASA and the US Intellegence wasn't lyeing about better, newer, cleaner fuel :)
  2. Mellownatts


    Joined: 14 Feb 2006

    Posts: 547

    Location: Leeds, W Yorks.

    Great for our next generation but will it really take until 2040 to even get a demonstration plant running and into the next century to adapt to this.
  3. D4VE


    Joined: 23 Oct 2003

    Posts: 8,899

    Location: Hampshire, UK

    Aye thats a long time to wait these days
  4. aardvark


    Joined: 2 Jan 2005

    Posts: 8,026

    Location: leeds

    strange, i thought they aggreed this last year and were already building it.

    anyway, its good news, but only in 100 years time - we still have to figure out alternatives until then.
  5. Turbanation


    Joined: 18 Oct 2005

    Posts: 788

    Location: London, UK

    The beginning of the end.
  6. fatiain


    Joined: 16 Oct 2004

    Posts: 7,647

    Location: Pratislava, Berk-shire

    Nah, it's the end of the middle of the beginning.
  7. Mellownatts


    Joined: 14 Feb 2006

    Posts: 547

    Location: Leeds, W Yorks.

    Do you not think this is a step in the right direction ?
  8. oweneades


    Joined: 17 Jul 2005

    Posts: 9,013

    I have seen programs on this sort of thing before. (although this story is news to me).

    They basically said although possibly, at the moment it requires ore enery to get it working than it produces.

    Unsure how valid that is but it would make sense as its a relatively new tech and fusing atoms takes mamouth amounts of energy.
  9. fatiain


    Joined: 16 Oct 2004

    Posts: 7,647

    Location: Pratislava, Berk-shire

    No, he's got shares in Exxon and Texaco.
  10. leaskovski


    Joined: 22 Oct 2004

    Posts: 9,086

    Location: Berkland

    There is no pleasing some people! :rolleyes:
  11. Trifid


    Joined: 18 Feb 2006

    Posts: 8,391

    Good (as long as it doesn't blow up/site for terrorist attack.)

    Nuclear fules are the future, build some nuclear plants until then.
  12. Messiah Khan


    Joined: 1 Sep 2005

    Posts: 10,000

    Location: Scottish Highlands

    As said in another recent thread about this, I have been following this project for some time now. The theory for a Nuclear fusion plant is all sound, its just getting it to actually work. So far they have only managed to keep the reaction going for 5 seconds(Doesn't sound much, but is infact a big step forward) and the reaction uses far more energy than it creates. However if this eperimental reactor works as planned(I see no reason why it shouldn't) Then we can expect to see lots of relatively cheap and very clean energy.
  13. spirit

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,885

    thats why its in france :p
  14. WantoN


    Joined: 11 Jun 2003

    Posts: 10,650

    Location: Hampshire

    The beginning of the end of the beginning? Mother of God :eek:

    Ant :cool:
  15. Tommy B


    Joined: 23 Nov 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    Terrorists funded by Esso will pwn it with nerve gas :rolleyes:

    /too much 24.
  16. Minto


    Joined: 15 Jun 2004

    Posts: 756

    This kind of attitude irritates me. The author of this statement clearly has no concept of the differences between fusion and fission.

    Regardless of the fact that a properly built fission reactor is inherantly safe*, the uninformed seem to assume that the same percieved dangers apply to fission. If a fusion reactor were to lose the containment of the plasma the worst that would happen is it would melt the reactor. More likely is the reaction would just cease. Fusion require some very special conditions to occur, fission will just run away with itself unless controlled very carefully.

    Fusion is inherantly safe because unlike fission, if you leave it to its own devices (when on a non-solar scale) it will simply stop. It should also be noted that there can be NO heavy radioactive elements produced by a fusion reactor, as the binding energy curve peaks at lead, meaning anything heavier than lead is not made.

    In addition to that fact, fusion is one of the only renewable energy sources that is globally applicable, in every environment, and hence is clearly a sensible method to research.

    * (for reasons such as gravity assisted control rods, that fall into the reactor by gravity if there were to be any kind of faliure, hence stopping an explosion)
    Last edited: 25 May 2006
  17. Freefaller

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 5 Jun 2003

    Posts: 87,173

    Location: Falling...

    Woop there it is! :(

    I remember reading about this a few years ago (it's taken something like a dozen years (?) to get it agreed). It's very exciting - and I hope it works out. Renewable and nuclear energy rocks.
  18. Red and White


    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 8,921

    not going to have a demonstration power plant running until 2040

    ffs :rolleyes:
  19. iCraig


    Joined: 21 Apr 2004

    Posts: 13,314

    Location: Wolverhampton

    Sounds good, but another 34 years for a demo site?!

    What the hell will they be doing in the three decades until then?
  20. Nozzer


    Joined: 17 Oct 2002

    Posts: 9,495

    Location: Sunny South-East

    Spending the advance on hookers and cocaine.