6 ms·
I don't know about the waste being worse, since none of it will be transuranic. All short-lived activation of a few hundred years at most, you could just switch
by Mvandenbergh 12y ago
I don't know about the waste being worse, since none of it will be transuranic. All short-lived activation of a few hundred years at most, you could just switch it off and mothball it really.
Totally agreed about the neutron embrittlement, I think that (IFMIF aside) this issue has just been brushed aside as a materials engineering 'detail' to be dealt with as part of commercialisation in a few decades when it might actually make the whole concept of using fusion for energy impractical.
- dmfdmf 12y agoI think my prof's main point was that the volume of waste could be problematic. If a fusion reactor had a 50-60 year life it could activate a lot of material. The volume of fission reactor waste is small enough to be stored on site (so far) for decades and reprocessing can reduce that dramatically.