CO2... do I have to explain that it is part of the cycle of life on Earth? Uranium isn't. Neither is Thorium or Rubidium. Nothing will recycle these fusion waste products in a span of 50,000 years. They will accumulate.
I think the main reason fusion energy hasn't been done (besides opposition to the radioactive waste) is that it isn't possible or economical. It's all been worked out somewhere and it just hasn't been made public. ITER is only being built for research purposes, because the researchers don't care whether it becomes a clean source of power. All they care about is their research. Because they are researchers. It's what they do. Clean energy is just a cover story for their political advocacy.
Space/Science » in reply to I think you're starting to get a bit silly.
I don't think fusion will ever be a source of electricity
The whole thread (21 posts)
- A Nuclear Fusion Reactor - in just twenty years...
- 30 years of personal perspective on fusion
- Nuclear Fusion is bogus man (n/t)
- re: Nuclear Fusion is bogus man
- These futile arguments keep my brain working for some reason, product of experience I suppose
- re: These futile arguments keep my brain working for some reason, product of experience I suppose
- For the simple reason that there's no uranium mining and processing involved,...
- It takes billions of times more energy to create antimatter than it yields from reactions
- re: These futile arguments keep my brain working for some reason, product of experience I suppose
- These futile arguments keep my brain working for some reason, product of experience I suppose
- re: Nuclear Fusion is bogus man
- "The Energy of the Future"...
