"some models of gen iv of nuclear power plants can pretty much do the same" I'd be interested to know which fission plants make fuel recycling and waste disposal trivial, I could make a lot of money! In reality, even…
Fission creates neutron embrittled materials and steels as well. And yes we tend to store them until they can be safely disposed. Again, the main difference is the fuel. Tritium is safe in a few decades, spent uranium…
Landmark paper is a strong term for something that has been repeatedly debunked and then ignored by the nuclear physics community (all its citations are cold fusion journals...) The theory Widom and Larsen propose…
It's mainly the waste. Nuclear fission is a stable source of energy that does not produce carbon emissions in production. It's pretty much the answer to the climate crisis except that it produces dangerous waste that is…
agreed! the CEO of JET (largest working fusion reactor, until ITER is finished) Ian Chapman said in a lecture that renewables (and nuclear fission) are key to holding off climate change until fusion is a more mature…
It's not a dumb question. The answer is kinda dumb though, most working fusion reactors don't have a way to extract heat yet. But the plan is to use the same turbine (heat water into steam) technology from fission…
That article is quite outdated, JET has 2020 D-T campaign. More importantly, fusion is a thousand times better than fission with respect to waste. No one is claiming there is no waste at all, but tritium has a half-life…
You're confusing the strong and weak nuclear forces from particle physics with the fission and fusion nuclear reactions. The (residual) strong force underpins the energy release in both fission and fusion reactions.…
"some models of gen iv of nuclear power plants can pretty much do the same" I'd be interested to know which fission plants make fuel recycling and waste disposal trivial, I could make a lot of money! In reality, even…
Fission creates neutron embrittled materials and steels as well. And yes we tend to store them until they can be safely disposed. Again, the main difference is the fuel. Tritium is safe in a few decades, spent uranium…
Landmark paper is a strong term for something that has been repeatedly debunked and then ignored by the nuclear physics community (all its citations are cold fusion journals...) The theory Widom and Larsen propose…
It's mainly the waste. Nuclear fission is a stable source of energy that does not produce carbon emissions in production. It's pretty much the answer to the climate crisis except that it produces dangerous waste that is…
agreed! the CEO of JET (largest working fusion reactor, until ITER is finished) Ian Chapman said in a lecture that renewables (and nuclear fission) are key to holding off climate change until fusion is a more mature…
It's not a dumb question. The answer is kinda dumb though, most working fusion reactors don't have a way to extract heat yet. But the plan is to use the same turbine (heat water into steam) technology from fission…
That article is quite outdated, JET has 2020 D-T campaign. More importantly, fusion is a thousand times better than fission with respect to waste. No one is claiming there is no waste at all, but tritium has a half-life…
You're confusing the strong and weak nuclear forces from particle physics with the fission and fusion nuclear reactions. The (residual) strong force underpins the energy release in both fission and fusion reactions.…