46c.Fission Energy vs. Fusion Energy
[Martin Greenwald has worked on fusion energy experiments for 35 years. He is a senior research scientist at MIT where he is the associate director of its Plasma Science & Fusion Center. He has a couple of undergraduate degrees from MIT and a Ph.D. in physics from the University of California -– Berkeley. His research centers on plasma turbulence and transport. He’s published over 200 papers on plasma physics and experimental data management. Some have actually been read by his colleagues. (click) ]
A Fission Reactor
Fission energy comes with radioactive byproducts, which produce heat that can't be eliminated. A fission plant is fueled with enriched uranium for a year or two. The disaster at Fukushima was a consequence. When the earthquake and tsunami damaged the plant and all sources of electricity to run the cooling pumps, the reactor cores melted and released radioactive products into the environment. Some of these radioactive products are chemically volatile and biologically active -- they can move through the environment and accumulate in living organisms.
A Fusion Reactor
A fusion reactor would never have more than a few seconds of fuel in it at any time -- there is no way it could melt down. The metal structures that make up a fusion reactors would become mildly radioactive over time and would need to be isolated, but after about a hundred years, the materials could be recycled or buried -- no permanent waste disposal would be required.
Greenwald says that the development of fusion power requires money and time. Its management by different nations is slow and inefficient. Since all nations are u under God, I say that fusion energy would develop faster if all nations were working together and the British economic system was trashed throughout the world..