4 ms·

There certainly is enough fusion fuel on earth to power humanity at 10 or 100x current consumption until the sun explodes without emitting any CO2. Same can be

There certainly is enough fusion fuel on earth to power humanity at 10 or 100x current consumption until the sun explodes without emitting any CO2. Same can be said for fission, but it only powers 5% of the world due to what can be called complications (even though many scientists insist that it's safe and responsible). Fusion is expected to have fewer complications, but we won't know until we scale up a fleet of fusion power plants and understand all the nuance. How's that for an answer?

pier25 7y ago
Good answer! > Same can be said for fission, but it only powers 5% of the world due to what can be called complications But weren't these complications obvious before deciding to scale up fission power plants? The ones I know about: - Radioactive waste - Risk of failure - Unavoidable EOL
- acidburnNSA 7y ago
  Certainly the generation of radioactive material in fission plants was considered potentially fatal all the way back to Fermi, who said way back when: > It is not clear that the public will accept an energy source that produces this much radioactivity and that can be subject to diversion of material for bombs. However, the nuclear fission industry has arguably shown that it can technically manage radioactive wastes without undue harm to the populace. Fission plants have killed up to 4000 people while producing 5% of the world's energy. Fossil kills 4.2M people/year at 84% total energy. The math suggests that nuclear fission has been highly successful. But the public largely still doesn't like it. Fusion indeed has a better going-in position. Potential complications involve how hard/complex/expensive it is to realize the engineering challenges. Aneutronic fusion plants, like fossil plants, will likely also have an EOL from a thermal creep, corrosion, cracking, etc. POV. Normal fusion plants will definitely have a EOL from neutron doses to structural materials.
  - pier25 7y ago
    Thank you for your comments. It's great to have someone knowledgeable about these topics give some ELI5 answers. > Fossil kills 4.2M people/year Where does this number come from?
    - acidburnNSA 7y ago
      You're welcome! That number comes from the WHO: https://www.who.int/airpollution/ambient/health-impacts/en/ https://www.who.int/airpollution/ambient/health-impacts/en/
  - wchar_t 7y ago
    > But the public largely still doesn't like it. That's really sad.
  - coda_ 7y ago
    Appreciate all your comments here. As someone that knows a lot about this stuff, may I ask... would you have any concerns living near (say 5 miles) from a deep geological repository, like what is described here: https://www.nwmo.ca/en/A-Safe-Approach/Facilities/Deep-Geological-Repository/ https://www.nwmo.ca/en/A-Safe-Approach/Facilities/Deep-Geolo...
    - acidburnNSA 7y ago
      I spent the first 17 years of my life 5 miles from an operating nuclear power plant. The stored nuclear waste from this plant is still there (though the plant itself was decommissioned). When I visit my family, I am right there next to it. It sits in dry casks exactly like these [1]. I feel 100% safe being in that situation at all times, and I know in elaborate detail the characteristics of nuclear waste and radiation in general. If the waste was 500m below ground in a designed deep geologic repository I wouldn't feel that much safer (because I already feel totally safe from the dry casks). But it would be at least a little more out of reach for terrorists and whatnot so from that perspective, yeah I'd prefer if it was underground. I would gladly put my house and raise my family directly on top of a deep geologic nuclear waste repository. This really isn't reckless. I have a Geiger counter. I know what levels of radiation are safe. I know the risks. It's exceedingly low. I am far more worried about hamburgers. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUvvIzH2W6g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUvvIzH2W6g
      - coda_ 7y ago
        Amazing. Thank you very much for your message on this.
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    Just reading Wikipedia at random, made me feel like the solution to the waste problem and global warming is simply to build lots of breeder reactors and forget about non-proliferation. Everything else is just avoiding the only feasible solution. Take the waste and burn it to make more power.

pier25 7y ago

Good answer! > Same can be said for fission, but it only powers 5% of the world due to what can be called complications But weren't these complications obvious before deciding to scale up fission power plants? The ones I know about: - Radioactive waste - Risk of failure - Unavoidable EOL

acidburnNSA 7y ago
Certainly the generation of radioactive material in fission plants was considered potentially fatal all the way back to Fermi, who said way back when: > It is not clear that the public will accept an energy source that produces this much radioactivity and that can be subject to diversion of material for bombs. However, the nuclear fission industry has arguably shown that it can technically manage radioactive wastes without undue harm to the populace. Fission plants have killed up to 4000 people while producing 5% of the world's energy. Fossil kills 4.2M people/year at 84% total energy. The math suggests that nuclear fission has been highly successful. But the public largely still doesn't like it. Fusion indeed has a better going-in position. Potential complications involve how hard/complex/expensive it is to realize the engineering challenges. Aneutronic fusion plants, like fossil plants, will likely also have an EOL from a thermal creep, corrosion, cracking, etc. POV. Normal fusion plants will definitely have a EOL from neutron doses to structural materials.
- pier25 7y ago
  Thank you for your comments. It's great to have someone knowledgeable about these topics give some ELI5 answers. > Fossil kills 4.2M people/year Where does this number come from?
  - acidburnNSA 7y ago
    You're welcome! That number comes from the WHO: https://www.who.int/airpollution/ambient/health-impacts/en/ https://www.who.int/airpollution/ambient/health-impacts/en/
- wchar_t 7y ago
  > But the public largely still doesn't like it. That's really sad.
- coda_ 7y ago
  Appreciate all your comments here. As someone that knows a lot about this stuff, may I ask... would you have any concerns living near (say 5 miles) from a deep geological repository, like what is described here: https://www.nwmo.ca/en/A-Safe-Approach/Facilities/Deep-Geological-Repository/ https://www.nwmo.ca/en/A-Safe-Approach/Facilities/Deep-Geolo...
  - acidburnNSA 7y ago
    I spent the first 17 years of my life 5 miles from an operating nuclear power plant. The stored nuclear waste from this plant is still there (though the plant itself was decommissioned). When I visit my family, I am right there next to it. It sits in dry casks exactly like these [1]. I feel 100% safe being in that situation at all times, and I know in elaborate detail the characteristics of nuclear waste and radiation in general. If the waste was 500m below ground in a designed deep geologic repository I wouldn't feel that much safer (because I already feel totally safe from the dry casks). But it would be at least a little more out of reach for terrorists and whatnot so from that perspective, yeah I'd prefer if it was underground. I would gladly put my house and raise my family directly on top of a deep geologic nuclear waste repository. This really isn't reckless. I have a Geiger counter. I know what levels of radiation are safe. I know the risks. It's exceedingly low. I am far more worried about hamburgers. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUvvIzH2W6g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUvvIzH2W6g
    - coda_ 7y ago
      Amazing. Thank you very much for your message on this.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  Just reading Wikipedia at random, made me feel like the solution to the waste problem and global warming is simply to build lots of breeder reactors and forget about non-proliferation. Everything else is just avoiding the only feasible solution. Take the waste and burn it to make more power.