It has been called the holy grail of energy technology; a perfectly clean source with an unlimited supply. Nuclear fusion has been demonstrated to be possible, but converting it to a viable energy source remains technically elusive. However, research on making fusion energy reality is in progress, and there are some who are convinced that the day will come when this free and abundant source will arrive.
Our current nuclear technology, fission, is the breaking of the atomic nucleus, which releases massive amounts of energy. For a fusion reaction, the nuclei of two atoms fuse together to form a heavier nucleus. The resulting release of energy is incredibly large. To put it in perspective, fusion is the power of the sun, a force strong enough to heat a planet that is 93 million miles away.
The fuels for a fusion reaction are the hydrogen isotopes, deuterium and tritium, which are abundantly found in seawater. Experts estimate that there is enough deuterium in seawater to last practically forever. Riccardo Betti, professor at the University of Rochester’s Laboratory for Laser Energetics and a leading expert on nuclear fusion, believes that the deuterium found in one cubic kilometer of seawater is equivalent in terms of energy to the entire world’s oil supply.
Another great advantage of fusion is that it does not produce any harmful byproducts. For example, spent fuel from standard fission plants is highly radioactive, and what to do with it has become a major problem. For fusion, two hydrogen atoms combine to form helium, a harmless noble gas.
A myriad of technical problems keep nuclear fusion just beyond our reach at the moment. Material science has not progressed far enough yet to provide a material that can withstand the rigors of the fusion chamber. Also lasers, which are used to fire at the deuterium, have to fire accurately at a small deuterium pellet ten times per second, which has proved challenging. Plus, recent experiments at fusion reaction have not produced enough energy to make up for the energy that gets put in.
Scientists like Professor Betti are working on new designs for fusion reactions, hoping that they can come across a viable model for large-scale deployment. For example, inertial confinement fusion is being developed at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and aided by the University of Rochester. The process solidifies the isotopes into pellets, shoots lasers at the pellets, and then pressurizes them to about 500 billion atmospheres (one atmosphere equals standard air pressure at sea level). This ignites the pellet into a fusion reaction.
If fusion becomes a reality, we can all say goodbye to fossil fuels for providing electricity. We can also say goodbye to other renewables like solar and wind. Fusion offers the promise of unlimited energy without any of the harmful side effects. It would revolutionize our attitudes towards electricity use, and no doubt spawn new innovative uses of electricity. It would no doubt, launch humanity into a new era.
For more information: http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=3688
Article by David A. Gabel, appearing courtesy ENN.
No harmful side effects? Perfectly Clean? Unlimited? Really?
Is this a junior high school paper?
Please do a little more research before writing your next article on fusion.
Mark, you questioned this article with out really giving your defense. So please, explain yourself. I’d like to know. since so far EVERY website has said that Fusion is the greatest of powers, where if managed to be kept contained the power we would get would be huge. I do see where it may not be the cleanest, mining the rocks for lithium and drawing water from the ocean, but those are minor compared to how much energy we’d receive. To quote you, mark,
“Please do a little more research before writing your next article [or][comment] on fusion.”
Fusion sounds fantastic in theory. However there are 2 major problems with the technology:
1) The most efficient deuterium-tritium reactions are typically measured in milliseconds. Less efficient deuterium-deuterium reactions have been shown to last more than 1 second. But no reaction has been shown to replace the energy used to make it occur.
2)No one has yet figured out how to build a reactor that can contain all the energy that commercial fusion reactors would generate. For the past 40 years fusion power has been “10 years away”.
While I am all for the basic science aspects of fusion research because it expands our collective knowledge of physics, we need to focus our limited resources on combating climate change in the very near term before we reach catastrophic tipping points. The technologies that can help us do that are already deployable – energy efficiency, solar, wind, biomass, and geothermal. We need to make these technologies more available by reducing fossil fuel subsidies.
The second issue I have with the article is the tone it sets. By focusing on “limitless” energy sources, the article seems to promote the extraction-based mentality that got us into the environmental problems we currently face in the first place. By some estimates there are only 80 years of lithium reserves at current consumption rates. Lithium would be one of the primary feedstocks for fusion power. Furthermore, at their core, climate change and sustainability are about payment for ecosystem services. How much do we value clean air, clean water, food, fiber, fuel, biodiversity, aesthetics, etc.? We should be promoting ideas that encourage a nurturing, additive mentality that promotes reuse, recycling, and conservation, not an extractive one.
Comments are closed.