July 20, 2024, 08:32:55 AM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting

Topic: Ersatz for Natural Gas?  (Read 22406 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Enthalpy

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4038
  • Mole Snacks: +304/-59
Re: Ersatz for Natural Gas?
« Reply #90 on: June 25, 2022, 05:15:11 PM »
Uranium reactors would release their radioactivity like Chernobyl if bombed
Hypothetical hydrogen fusion reactors would too.

I already explained that tritium regeneration is necessary at fusion reactors and would produce as much radioactive waste as uranium reactors do
Since I put that on the Web, the fusion promoters refined their rhetoric. No more deuterium-tritium "from the Ocean". No more "limitless clean energy": fusion now only "avoids long-lived radioactive waste". Maybe, if we have no bad surprise. But the short- and medium-lived radioactive waste would be quite present, with radiation, half-lives and amount similar to iodine, strontium and cesium. And if a bomb or impactor bursts such a fusion reactor, the radioactivity will spread.

Though, small fusion reactors not meant for energy can usefully replace fission reactors to produce radioisotopes for medicine and more
Using and regenerating no tritium, they would "only" activate their materials by neutron irradiation, and with a flux 105× smaller. The flux per material amount 102× smaller eases the insoluble problem of double neutron activation 107×.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2022, 05:30:27 PM by Enthalpy »

Offline Borek

  • Mr. pH
  • Administrator
  • Deity Member
  • *
  • Posts: 27747
  • Mole Snacks: +1804/-411
  • Gender: Male
  • I am known to be occasionally wrong.
    • Chembuddy
Re: Ersatz for Natural Gas?
« Reply #91 on: June 26, 2022, 07:00:00 AM »

This thread has long run its course, now it is just Enthalpy's rants over whatever.
ChemBuddy chemical calculators - stoichiometry, pH, concentration, buffer preparation, titrations.info

Sponsored Links