It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Unleashing star power

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Unleashing star power


www.russiatoday.com

This ambitious project, known as ITER, has been undertaken jointly by the EU, China, India, Japan, Korea, Russia and the USA. It is the biggest scientific experiment in the world and its scale is only matched by the importance of its potential success.

In a world where energy has become an international security issue – where the price and supply of oil and gas can lead to ‘energy wars’ – this huge $10 billion mega-experiment could provide the peaceful answer by producing energy of the stars, like our own sun, with little or no emissions.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   
I think that is the future for our energy needs. It is only a matter of time (and lots of money) before we can emulate the Sun and create efficient and non polluting energy. Apparently it is very safe, I just hope to see the day when this technology comes to our lives. Hydrogen is widely available, Oil has reached its peak and taken its toll now its the time to move on


www.russiatoday.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I am in support of this technology however there are a few facts that people tend to miss out. First of all yes hydrogen is widely available, but from oilfields. I know everyone likes to fantasize about getting it from water but the fact is that the amount of energy required is huge and uneconomical. The hydrogen used in hydrogen cars, making ammonia, fusion reactors etc. are aquired by drilling like you would for other fossil fuels.

Secondly although the process is in itself safe and with minimal risk of explosion, failure etc. it is if a terrorist gains access to the reactors controls or if the equipment controlling it is seriously damaged then it will create a extremely destructive reaction which will be self-fuelling for a short time increasing how dangerous it is.

Despite this I am behind this and other sorts of power production using nuclear energy as I believe it to be the way forward. Plus a different form of nuclear fusion reactor can fueled off the waste of a fission reactor.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Finally, people are taking fusion seriously.

The theories have been sound all along, the problem with fusion is it takes some incredibly precise variables being kept constant in order to keep it reacting.

If it slides ever so slightly out of operating parameters, the entire reaction just shuts off... then you have to go about the process of restarting it.


Luckily with fusion, there's no real danger, not like with fission reactors.
If you damage it, neglect it, whatever, the entire system just shuts down. It takes constant work to keep the reaction going... unlike in fission reactors where it takes constant work to keep the reaction controlled.

It's safe, clean... and it requires hydrogen to continue functioning... something we have an incredible abundance of here on earth.

[edit on 20-1-2009 by johnsky]



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cauch1
I am in support of this technology however there are a few facts that people tend to miss out. First of all yes hydrogen is widely available, but from oilfields. I know everyone likes to fantasize about getting it from water but the fact is that the amount of energy required is huge and uneconomical. The hydrogen used in hydrogen cars, making ammonia, fusion reactors etc. are aquired by drilling like you would for other fossil fuels.

Secondly although the process is in itself safe and with minimal risk of explosion, failure etc. it is if a terrorist gains access to the reactors controls or if the equipment controlling it is seriously damaged then it will create a extremely destructive reaction which will be self-fuelling for a short time increasing how dangerous it is.

Despite this I am behind this and other sorts of power production using nuclear energy as I believe it to be the way forward. Plus a different form of nuclear fusion reactor can fueled off the waste of a fission reactor.

hydrogen is also widely availeble at our gasgiants in outerspace but the moon has a fusion fuel that is even more potent then hydrogen. its called Helium 3. secondly the proces of getting hydrogen from seawater is getting cheaper and better by the year and when we build our first fusion reactor potent enough the process is even cheaper then getting oil out our ground.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarkLuitzen
hydrogen is also widely availeble at our gasgiants in outerspace but the moon has a fusion fuel that is even more potent then hydrogen. its called Helium 3.


although they may have abundant amounts of hydrogen there is the slight problem of taking several decades to get there and back again (lol tolkein). Even collecting your mentioned Helium 3 from the moon would be very time consuming, expensive and would require huge amounts of fuel.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   
wow... i didn't know that this was an international project.

I was only aware of this effort being made in California;
www.abovetopsecret.com...

An optimistic hypothetical to consider, if successful... do we open up the technology to private enterprise or do we maintain it as a public resource, much like we do with water and public roadways?



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by The All Seeing I
An optimistic hypothetical to consider, if successful... do we open up the technology to private enterprise or do we maintain it as a public resource, much like we do with water and public roadways?


At first it would have to be nationalized ventures. The initial costs of running these reactors wouldn't be profitable enough to private investors to draw them into funding such a thing.

As such, the nations themselves would have to fund these plants.


Once the technology and designs become more commonplace, we will see private ventures into such things... but not until the process of building and maintaining the reactors becomes efficient and reliable.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Hydrogen is also available from water!!! Duh.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Hydrogen is also available from water!!! Duh.


Have you tried to gain even a slight understanding of the topic here. Don't you think that if it was as simple as that then hydrogen powered cars would be commonplace by now. Yes hydrogen is available from water but to extract it takes a vast amount of energy far more than you get from using it in a hydrogen reactor. A hydrogen reactor powers things because when you combine oxygen and hydrogen to make water energy is released. Therefore if energy is released when you make water then more energy is used to split it. This would make splitting water to get hydrogen counter-productive to saving the environment, being more economical or whatever your goal is. Therefore princeofpeace although you are correct your point is not constructive and your mannerism serves only to show you do not understand the topic being discussed.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join