Nuclear energy on its way out.:)

On Jul 11, 6:14*pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 12/07/2011 10:06 AM, Richard Stephens wrote:

I wonder what these recent accidents will do to fusion research. Will
the average person think that all nuclear power is the same?

Well, they probably would, but I doubt that matters much as far as
research is concerned. If and when fusion plants were actually being
built around the world, there would have to be some education programs
designed to explain why a fusion plant cannot possibly suffer the kinds
of problem encountered with fission plants.

A good starting point would be a description of how difficult it's
proved to be to get fusion plants to function even when we want them to,
let alone when we don't

Sylvia.

Any sort of fusion powered source of energy is exactly the same as an
H-bomb. If you can do one, you can just as easily do the other.
Mook's version of a fusion thruster has an exhaust velocity of 33,000
km/sec, so there's really no telling how much global WMD kind of
trouble we'll all be in when most everyone has access to fusion
energy.

I'd still favor going for it, even though it would be technically
impossible to remote detect a fusion powered WMD that doesn't even
have to be all that large or massive.

“1 kg of lithium-6 deuteride releases 576 trillion joules of energy”

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On 12/07/2011 11:51 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Jul 11, 6:14 pm, Sylvia wrote:
On 12/07/2011 10:06 AM, Richard Stephens wrote:

I wonder what these recent accidents will do to fusion research. Will
the average person think that all nuclear power is the same?

Well, they probably would, but I doubt that matters much as far as
research is concerned. If and when fusion plants were actually being
built around the world, there would have to be some education programs
designed to explain why a fusion plant cannot possibly suffer the kinds
of problem encountered with fission plants.

A good starting point would be a description of how difficult it's
proved to be to get fusion plants to function even when we want them to,
let alone when we don't

Sylvia.

Any sort of fusion powered source of energy is exactly the same as an
H-bomb.

So given that H-bombs already exist, there should be no problem building
fusion reactors.

But there is a problem, so perhaps they're not exactly the same.

Sylvia.

On Jul 11, 7:50*pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 12/07/2011 11:51 AM, Brad Guth wrote:









On Jul 11, 6:14 pm, Sylvia *wrote:
On 12/07/2011 10:06 AM, Richard Stephens wrote:

I wonder what these recent accidents will do to fusion research. Will
the average person think that all nuclear power is the same?

Well, they probably would, but I doubt that matters much as far as
research is concerned. If and when fusion plants were actually being
built around the world, there would have to be some education programs
designed to explain why a fusion plant cannot possibly suffer the kinds
of problem encountered with fission plants.

A good starting point would be a description of how difficult it's
proved to be to get fusion plants to function even when we want them to,
let alone when we don't

Sylvia.

Any sort of fusion powered source of energy is exactly the same as an
H-bomb.

So given that H-bombs already exist, there should be no problem building
fusion reactors.

But there is a problem, so perhaps they're not exactly the same.

Sylvia.

That's true, because the fly-by-rocket or electrical energy via such
fusion methods of what Mook is suggesting isn't exactly a viable bomb
that can get delivered without such logistics being easily detected
and/or noticed by most anyone. However, constructing a fusion bomb
that's cloaked as a reactor for obtaining clean energy, such as in the
center of any significant city is quite doable, or even as a research
reactor that can ingest a kg of Li6 could prove somewhat problematic
for a very large area.

Perhaps keeping the reactor fuel load down to a maximum of one gram,
and thereby only creating .576e12 joules per fusion jolt might be good
enough, though 58.736e9 kgf is still a worthy reaction blast that
starts off at 33,000 km/sec.

This fusion seems kind of like a precursor to matter and antimatter
that should produce a radial explosion of nearly 150,000 km/sec.

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”