Comments on: Nuclear Fusion Alternative Energy

By: Andrea Ribiero

Andrea Ribiero — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 13:32:39 +0000

Hello, just thought you’d be interested to know that I have saved you to my bookmarks because of your great blog layout (LOL). With that said, seriously, I think your blog has one of the cleanest design I’ve seen yet. It really helps make reading your blog a lot easier.

By: Surek Prakash

Surek Prakash — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:54:38 +0000

i have been advocating this for a long time now

By: Jomomma7II

Jomomma7II — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:07:45 +0000

its too bad that the 1st one that isnt a prototype isnt expected to be done until 2035…

By: Jomomma7II

Jomomma7II — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:07:45 +0000

the hydrogen bombs are different. they use nuclea FISION

By: saturnhexagon

saturnhexagon — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:07:45 +0000

Fusion occurs in the sun because of its massive gravity and heat. With enough energy and heat you could probably make fusion occur here on earth, but the cost of the energy put in would outweigh any output.

By: prashanth817

prashanth817 — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:07:45 +0000

@chairde
Fusion has been experimented and to confirm what krazyzeeban said, its an uncontrolled mechanism as in the case of the bomb. The main problem with fusion in a controlled manner is containing the plasma. Magnetic fields haven’t been entirely successful. Nevertheless fusion is a renewable source and just as Solar was once very inefficient with p-v cells and is now becoming more feasible with parabolic mirrors and etc, fusion technology will probably advance for electricity generation.

By: krayzeebean

krayzeebean — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:07:45 +0000

Just because it uses more energy now doesn’t mean that it’ll always be that way. If you give up just because your first experiments don’t work out perfectly then we’d still be in the stone age.

ITER is expected to produce more energy than it consumes, and other reactor designs theoretically will produce more energy than you put in. Solar power alone isn’t enough to satisfy the worlds demand for energy.

By: chairde

chairde — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:07:45 +0000

It is a good wish to have but it is simply not feasible in reality. Those experiments are bogus and the Europeans are not going to succeed. Control of the chain reaction is important and also why have an energy source that takes more energy than it will produce? In any case, I wish the Europeans well. Go solar instead, God has already worked out the control problems and other issues.:-)

By: krayzeebean

krayzeebean — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:07:45 +0000

The hydrogen bomb uses a fission explosion to compress a secondary fuel, resulting in a fusion explosion. Read up on hydrogen bombs and come back. I say again sir, JET has already performed a fusion experiment generating electricity. The problem with fusion power now is that it requires more energy than we get out of it, but it’s still fusion. ITER is expected to generate more power than was input. Fusion power is much safer and cleaner than fission, something like Chernobyl is impossible.

By: Beelzeboogie

Beelzeboogie — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:07:44 +0000

Yeah but convincing 7 billion people to agree on something ain’t gonna happen.

I wouldn’t consider “a few thousand years” even with double the earth’s population to be particularly short term.

Maybe i’m just an optimist Give us a few thousand years and we won’t be confined to this rock any more.