3 ms·
It's a pretty big logical jump to say fusion has proliferation problem because it creates a neutron stream. It will be as if they build the Hadron collider to w
by a1371 5y ago
It's a pretty big logical jump to say fusion has proliferation problem because it creates a neutron stream. It will be as if they build the Hadron collider to warm up soup. It's unrelated to the plant operation, unlike fission.
I think this highlights the bias in the article you shared. Moreover, it solely focuses on ITER which is not a great example any more.
Fusion doesn't really have the problems of fission. Because fusion has been extremely underfunded, the money is being spent extra carefully on ITER. But MIT SPARC is using new super conductors to get much smaller reactors.
Reactors will produce some low level waste, but once we get a handle of the confinement, that issue can be eliminated with hydrogen isotope mixes. Also, Tokamak is only one fusion design, there may be better ways to capture the neutron stream.
- mullingitover 5y agoThese are all valid points, and I'm not saying we shouldn't do research on fusion. It certainly has promise. However, I don't think it has a serious chance of pulling a deus ex machina move and saving us from climate change in our lifetimes. A solid energy source a century from now? Sure. Fission on the other hand has a good chance of uprooting the fossil fuel industry, and combined with other renewables is our best chance of getting carbon emissions to a place where civilization might not go into a bronze age-style collapse from climate change.
- willis936 5y agoAs an industry insider: everyone knows this. Fusion isn't the technology that saves mankind in this century, but it is the technology that mankind needs to have working by the next century if we want to stay on our current industrial track. The march of progress might halt if we run out of ever-increasing access to free energy.