6 ms·

if we figured out fusion, it would alter the economics of all of this why not fusion powered ships/trains/airplanes

• worik 4y ago
  > why not fusion powered ships/trains/airplanes[?] What could possibly go wrong?
  • chrisco255 4y ago
    We already have fission powered ships and submarines.
    • jodrellblank 4y ago
      We almost had fission powered airplanes and airships: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear-powered_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear-powered_aircraft and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-1201 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-1201 And dreams of fission trains: https://twsmedia.co.uk/2020/05/09/atomic-trains/ https://twsmedia.co.uk/2020/05/09/atomic-trains/
      • worik 4y ago
        Sense prevailed, and we do not have civilian mobile nuclear reactors. The military are mad. Mad and bad. It is in the job description. We would all be better off if none of them (the military) existed
  • jasamer 4y ago
    Afaik what makes fusion hard is maintaining the conditions that allow fusion to occur. Because of this, it’s quite safe - if anything goes wrong, it’ll just stop working.
    • worik 4y ago
      Safe? Really? I expect that the containment vessels will get very radioactive. But all a bit hypothetical, since none exist
      • jodrellblank 4y ago
        Yes they do exist, link elsewhere in this thread, Helion have a 7th generation nuclear fusion reactor fusing once every ten seconds or so. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bDXXWQxK38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bDXXWQxK38 (It's not surplus of power, but it is repeatable fusion actually happening).
        • worik 4y ago
          That is not a fusion reactor