Nuclear fusion in a beaker - a reality?

[topicolo]

Certainly there it a better way to harvest the insane power of the intermolecular bond than using it like a household radiator! It's just so damn inefficient. Sad really.

technically, a nuclear reaction harnesses the power of an INTRAmolecular bond, as in the nuclear forces between protons and neutrons. In chemical reactions like the combustion of petroleum, the INTERmolecular bonds are broken. Needless to say, the intramolecular bonds release MUCH more energy than just combusting a bunch of kerosene or something.

 

[gopher]

Cold Fusion? 10 years ago Pons and Fleischman came to my college to talk about it. From the sounds of what they did, I don't believe they calibrated their thermometers. I wouldn't be surprised if these people did the same. Only through repetitive experimentation can you believe the results. If this is cold fusion, I'll eat my hat. Too many people trying to make a quick buck out there. Prove it works reliably first, then I'll believe it.

 

[windowsblowsass]

If we are to truly advance as a species and as energy users, we need to drop this stupid idea of boiling water to generate energy.
It makes sense to burn gasoline to boil water, but seriously think about it. We smash a ****ing atom! Why? So we can boil a ****ing pot of water?!? Meanwhile we have layers and layers of insulation so that the operators faces don't get melted Raiders of the Lost Ark style! Certainly there it a better way to harvest the insane power of the intermolecular bond than using it like a household radiator! It's just so damn inefficient. Sad really.

actually its extremely efficient like inchomprehensible effeciant ohh yeah and fusion is spliting an atom thats fission fusion is merging 2 atoms together ps the reason fusion is so hard to accomplish is that it gets so hot that it can not be contained byanything i heard something before about someone using some sort of gravity generator to keep the gases and such from touching the sides of the containment area

 

[MrMacMan]

yeah, it's dubious at best, but damn it, i want my Mr. Fusion by 2015 as Back to the Future II promised!

better start saving for my delorian now.

carry on.

paul

get the parts together fast man!

Its happening!

But really look.

Some groups have said it works others haven't.

We need it recorded and we need some proof.

We need it done several times with scientists which don't believe in it.

 

[MongoTheGeek]

Cold Fusion? 10 years ago Pons and Fleischman came to my college to talk about it. From the sounds of what they did, I don't believe they calibrated their thermometers. I wouldn't be surprised if these people did the same. Only through repetitive experimentation can you believe the results. If this is cold fusion, I'll eat my hat. Too many people trying to make a quick buck out there. Prove it works reliably first, then I'll believe it.

Pons and Fleishman were very careful chemists. They did show heat greater than energy in, but not enough to over come the limits of Carnot efficiency. In theory (even more unlikely than cold fusion) they built a no moving parts space heater. There were some people who were able to repeat but it was much more difficult to reproduce than the initial reports made it seem. Getting the experiment to reproduce is nigh on voodoo. Sometimes it works and others it doesn't. The theories that I have heard had to do with imperfections in the crystal structure of the anode.

 

[topicolo]

actually its extremely efficient like inchomprehensible effeciant ohh yeah and fusion is spliting an atom thats fission fusion is merging 2 atoms together ps the reason fusion is so hard to accomplish is that it gets so hot that it can not be contained byanything i heard something before about someone using some sort of gravity generator to keep the gases and such from touching the sides of the containment area

Uhhh... gravity generator? Are you sure you didn't hear that from Star Trek or something? We don't have the technology to "generate gravity." The heated deuterium atoms in a Tokamak fusion reactor has all of its electrons stripped off , creating a charged nucleus which is basically plasma. This plasma can be deflected away from the sides of reactor by giant magnetic fields which basically shield the sides of the reactor from melting.

Although the fusion reaction creates energy, the energy used to sustain the field and everything else is greater, so for now, fusion isn't useful.

 

[Santiago]

Remember, just 20 years ago no one believed in Plate Tectonics... now it's an established fact. 100 years ago, no one believed rocks could fall from the sky... now scientists are worried about giant meteors hitting the earth.

Plate tectonics was first proposed around 1930, but did not gain any real acceptance until the early 1960s.

 

[G4scott]

I heard something rather interesting today, and I'm definitely taking it with a grain of salt until I can verify it, but I was told that there is some lab that has a working fusion reactor. I don't know if this guy was telling the truth, or had just read about this, or what, but he claims that this fusion reactor has just started to produce more power than it consumes (which was the primary problem with them before). They also supposedly use radioactive waste for fuel, since this reactor gets hot enough to run off of anything you throw at it. To keep it from overheating, it uses sodium instead of water for cooling, because the sodium is able to keep the reactor stable, no matter how hot it gets. The only problem is that after this thing has eaten up all the radioactive waste, and landfill waste, and everything else we throw at it, we're out of fuel...

I would take all of this with a big grain of salt, but judging what all he does for a living, I think there might be credibility to all this...

 

[CapnMorgan]

If we are to truly advance as a species and as energy users, we need to drop this stupid idea of boiling water to generate energy.
It makes sense to burn gasoline to boil water, but seriously think about it. We smash a ****ing atom! Why? So we can boil a ****ing pot of water?!? Meanwhile we have layers and layers of insulation so that the operators faces don't get melted Raiders of the Lost Ark style! Certainly there it a better way to harvest the insane power of the intermolecular bond than using it like a household radiator! It's just so damn inefficient. Sad really.

Not to be an ass here, but how exactly do you think power generation works? Fossil fuels are burned to boil water, so that water can move a turbine to generate electricity. Boiling water isn't the end result, it's an intermediate step.

G4Scott,
I would take what your friend told you with a huge grain of salt. Using radioactive waste for fusion fuel makes absolutely no sense at all. Fusion = Combining light atoms to form heavy atoms. Most radioactive waste is composed of quite heavy atoms (transuranic, lead, iron, etc.) As I am to understand it, the fusion efforts have been to combine two hydrogen atoms to form helium and energy. As far as using sodium goes, liquid sodium is an excellent high temperature heat transfer fluid for high temperature reactors(500-850 C).

 

[Dippo]

Most radioactive waste is composed of quite heavy atoms (transuranic, lead, iron, etc.) As I am to understand it, the fusion efforts have been to combine two hydrogen atoms to form helium and energy. As far as using sodium goes, liquid sodium is an excellent high temperature heat transfer fluid for high temperature reactors(500-850 C).

Actually both Helium and CO2 is also used in both the Advanced Gas Cooled Reactor and Pebble Bed Reactor Design (of course in the AGCR the CO2 is only used as a primary coolant).

 

[MongoTheGeek]

Actually both Helium and CO2 is also used in both the Advanced Gas Cooled Reactor and Pebble Bed Reactor Design (of course in the AGCR the CO2 is only used as a primary coolant).

Typically in new designs gas is used for the primary and water is used in the secondary. This prevents having huge amounts of radioactive steam available for release and allows for a lower operating pressure inside the reactor.

Liquid sodium has been tried as well but there are issues with its reactivity and generally being a mess. Neither of which are insurmountable.

 

[Powerbook G5]

There have been some attempts with working cold fusion reactors which used ultra powerful magnetic containment to keep the plasma from making contact with the walls, but unfortunately, the process takes so much energy that the resulting output is barely enough to power the facility itself.

 

[jsw]

There have been some attempts with working cold fusion reactors which used ultra powerful magnetic containment to keep the plasma from making contact with the walls, but unfortunately, the process takes so much energy that the resulting output is barely enough to power the facility itself.

Do you have sources for that? I was unaware of any fusion systems that had gotten anywhere near breakeven, not had I heard of cold fusion being anything but a hoax. I'd be happy to be enlightened, though, if this is true.

 

[Powerbook G5]

I don't have time to do a lot of research, but just a quick google can bring up a few hits, such as:

http://www.pppl.gov/projects/pages/tftr.html

http://encarta.msn.com/media_461526151_761553206_-1_1/Tokamak_Fusion_Reactor.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_fusion_energy

I did a research project on magnetic fusion for science class a few years back and remember finding info on at least two fusion reactors that were in experimental use. I'd do much better research for you, but I have to go to class in five minutes.

 

[jsw]

I don't have time to do a lot of research, but just a quick google can bring up a few hits, such as:

http://www.pppl.gov/projects/pages/tftr.html

http://encarta.msn.com/media_461526151_761553206_-1_1/Tokamak_Fusion_Reactor.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_fusion_energy

I did a research project on magnetic fusion for science class a few years back and remember finding info on at least two fusion reactors that were in experimental use. I'd do much better research for you, but I have to go to class in five minutes.

Thanks for the search, but my points are that: (a) cold fusion is a hoax; and (b) fusion hasn't produced break-even energies yet. I know that we've had fusion reactors for some time. But they all suck more power than they produce - and none of them are "cold". Again, I'd be happy to be shown the path out of my ignorance, but none of those sites helped.

 

[Powerbook G5]

I know that nuclear fusion hasn't broken even, hence the comment I made about them barely able to light the light bulbs in the facilities themselves. It's just not mature enough as a technology. As far as it not being "cold" fusion, I am pretty sure that even at those extreme temperatures, they are considered to be "cold" fusion. The term cold, as far as I understand, can be applied if the reactor actively cools the plasma while in the process of keeping containment. It's been years since I've really looked at the technology, so I can't say I know much about the process anymore.