Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What do you believe would happen if we perfected a FUSION reactor for energy?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 16 2013 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
The second factor that comes into play is scalability, if the reactor can be scaled to say a size it can work in a car, I can see some people having a really bad day.


Why have the headache of attempting to contain a fiery ball of plasma safely in your car ?

Let the fusion reactors produce electricity and power your car with an electric battery.

Safer, cheaper and less complex.




posted on Aug, 16 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Erm... we pay for Solar energy, wind energy, thermal energy. You bet your ass that you'll be paying for Fusion energy too..



posted on Aug, 16 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


Hi Prof,

I tracked down an excellent BBC documentary which would compliment your O.P

It was once on Youtube and some other documentary sites but has since been removed. I manged to find it on Blip-TV.

Here is the link:
BBC: Can We Make A Star On Earth ?

Can We Make A Star On Earth ?


Professor Brian Cox takes a global journey in search of the energy source of the future. Called nuclear fusion, it is the process that fuels the sun and every other star in the universe. Yet despite over five decades of effort, scientists have been unable to get even a single watt of fusion electricity onto the grid. Brian returns to Horizon to find out why.

Granted extraordinary access to the biggest and most ambitious fusion experiments on the planet, Brian travels to the USA to see a high security fusion bomb testing facility in action and is given a tour of the world’s most powerful laser.

In South Korea, he clambers inside the reaction chamber of K-Star, the world’s first super-cooled, super-conducting fusion reactor where the fate of future fusion research will be decided. Nuclear fusion is nature’s power source. From the Sun to the most distant stars, the energy that lights up the Universe is released by sticking hydrogen nuclei together to make helium. Since hydrogen is the most abundant element in the Universe, it seems sensible to ask whether we might endeavor to do the same and power ourselves out of our serious energy crisis by building stars on Earth. The problem of course is that stars are big and hot; the Sun is the size of a million Earths, and burns six hundred million tonnes of hydrogen fuel every second.







________-

Did you know: Professor Brian Cox was once the keyboard player with the 90`s band D-REAM. They had a UK Number One hit with "Things Can Only Get Better" in 1993.

________



posted on Aug, 16 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   


As long as we have machines with moving parts there'll be a need for lubricants so oil will never go out of fashion and consider all the uses for crude oil apart from fuel and lubrication
reply to post by Pilgrum
 

Think outside the box. Today, many parts that were "moving" have been replaced by non-moving parts. Consider the electronics in today's cars, or the magnets that replaced wheels on trains that are now monorails. Someday, our personal vehicle may hoover over land, etc.



posted on Aug, 16 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   


I tracked down an excellent BBC documentary which would compliment your O.P It was once on Youtube and some other documentary sites but has since been removed. I manged to find it on Blip-TV.
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 

Thank you very much for this contribution to the OP. I really appreciate the effort you made to find this. Star(and 10 more if I could).



posted on Aug, 16 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus


 

Thank you very much for this contribution to the OP. I really appreciate the effort you made to find this. Star(and 10 more if I could).


It was my pleasure.


It is to my mind, mankinds next great leap forward.

_____

What do you believe would happen if we perfected a FUSION reactor for energy?

Its a great question. No doubt, it would have utterly immense implications for all facets of life.

But a key consideration would be who will benefit most. I don`t imagine that the blue prints will be posted online. It is conceivable that the technology will be licenced. Those countries not involved early in its development may not benefit as much as others. It may be this bottle-neck that is utilitised by nations to gain an edge.

______

Eventually, when most nations have access to the technology - a competitive edge may be found in the reactors reliability/ efficiency etc. Which brings us to using Helium-3 (H3) and even maybe sourcing it on the moon, if such a thing proved cost effective in the future.

The mind boggles with where it may lead us.

______



posted on Aug, 16 2013 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


I do think outside the box, but not so far outside that I can't even see the box any more and hover cars with no lubrication needs are somewhat over the horizon in terms of current real technology. The several fusion energy projects globally have yet to produce even as much energy as they need to induce momentary fusion but I can see some hope of eventual success.

The cost of that energy will be obscenely high though moving us even further away from the dream of 'free' energy. There's already a rising opposition to increasing energy prices and fusion energy with its own high overall costs will not relieve us of the burden, it will make it even worse.

So I can foresee civil unrest if we're forced to take 'clean' energy at several times the current price just because it's 'clean and good for the environment'.
edit on 16/8/2013 by Pilgrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   


I do think outside the box, but not so far outside that I can't even see the box any more and hover cars with no lubrication needs are somewhat over the horizon in terms of current real technology.
reply to post by Pilgrum
 

Hover cars are not so far outside the box. In fact, several manufacturers are working on them now, including Volkswagon and Hyundai .
Here is what dailytech says about the timetable.
www.dailytech.com...



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 02:45 AM
link   
I can relieve some folks' fears, expressed elsewhere in this thread. If (I prefer to think 'when', but so far, it's 'if') we develop practical fusion power, the major oil companies aren't going to sabotage the plants and 'disappear' the scientists and engineers. Oil accounts for a whopping 5% of the world's electrical generation capacity, behind natural gas (21%), hydroelectric power (16%) and nuclear (13%), and only slightly ahead of the catch-all 'everything else' (3%). The aforementioned engineers might want to avoid Kentucky and West Virginia, though, since coal accounts for 41% of the total. (Figures from the World Coal Association website and valid as of 2009).

Fusion power probably won't be free, or cheap, either. As noted above, it's going to be fairly infrastructure-intensive, and there's going to be a lot of sunk cost to recover.

Based on those two items, the biggest short-term impact might start with the construction of several large fusion power plants. There will be an economic demand for them (the utility companies will be salivating at the thought of using (relatively) cheap water vs expensive coal for fuel, and people in general will be more than thrilled at the thought of more available electricity), and most of the environmental objections to new power plant construction just got shot out of the airlock. All of that construction is going to mean at the least, a minor boom in the building trades, which will mean substantial amounts of money flowing through the economy even before the current starts flowing through the grid.

Based on recent trends, right behind the construction crews will come the Minions waving their usual array of "Nuclear Doomsday" signs, protesting to protect our water and predicting mayhem...



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by UmbraSumus



_____

What do you believe would happen if we perfected a FUSION reactor for energy?

Its a great question. No doubt, it would have utterly immense implications for all facets of life.

But a key consideration would be who will benefit most. I don`t imagine that the blue prints will be posted online. It is conceivable that the technology will be licenced. Those countries not involved early in its development may not benefit as much as others. It may be this bottle-neck that is utilitised by nations to gain an edge.



This is key which is why I suggested earlier that if it is a Western Nation that develops it, the tech will probably spread fairly quickly. particularly in South America and possibly several key nations in Africa. Historically the western powers are quick to teach and give power generation tech to developing countries in the hopes of creating stability.



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by KeliOnyx

This is key which is why I suggested earlier that if it is a Western Nation that develops it, the tech will probably spread fairly quickly. particularly in South America and possibly several key nations in Africa. Historically the western powers are quick to teach and give power generation tech to developing countries in the hopes of creating stability.



I would`nt be so sure about that KeliOnyx.

Re: technology spreading quickly -(Using nuclear fission as an example)

I believe that currently, nations without nuclear fission technology would require at least a decade to build the necessary infrastructure and train the personal to operate the system - assuming of course that they have the finances to put such infrastructure in place.

They may allow such emerging nations to benefit from the technology e.g. sell `cheaper` energy to them - but the technology itself may remain a closely guarded secret long after its development.

Why, having invested so much in this nascent technology, would they so easily give the advantage to other nations ?

Ideally of course I would prefer to see all humanity benefit from what would be an amazing technological advancement - but the reality of the situation may be less charitable.

edit on 18-8-2013 by UmbraSumus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   


Based on recent trends, right behind the construction crews will come the Minions waving their usual array of "Nuclear Doomsday" signs, protesting to protect our water and predicting mayhem...
reply to post by Brother Stormhammer
 

It should not take long to educate the nuclear doomsday people to the safety of a fusion reactor. There is no risk of a meltdown, and should the process shut off, it would quickly cool down. In addition, the particles used have relatively short half lives, versus fission reactors, making disposal much easier, and much more practical.



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
There is no risk of a meltdown, and should the process shut off, it would quickly cool down. In addition, the particles used have relatively short half lives, versus fission reactors, making disposal much easier, and much more practical.


The lack of risk of a runaway reaction is a fantastic aspect of the technology.


______________


_____________
You might enjoy this Prof..... your thread prompted me to see what the current level of progress is in Europe.


European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA)

28 Countries signed an agreement to work on an energy source for the future. EFDA provides the framework, JET is the shared experiment, Fusion energy is the goal


PDF - link A Roadmap to the Realisation of Fusion Energy



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus




It should not take long to educate the nuclear doomsday people to the safety of a fusion reactor. There is no risk of a meltdown, and should the process shut off, it would quickly cool down. In addition, the particles used have relatively short half lives, versus fission reactors, making disposal much easier, and much more practical.


I really, really hope you're correct about the education delay...what makes me pessimistic is that even after 60+ years of explaining things, a stunning number of people still think that nuclear fission plants = nuclear warheads that might detonate at any minute. Given the overall panic reaction when 'fission' is mentioned, good luck convincing people that 'fusion' doesn't mean that PG$&E or the Salt River Project isn't trying to park Tsar Bomba in their back yard..



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Brother Stormhammer
 

I wish our country's motto had also been "Deny Ignorance". I spent a good deal of my life fighting ignorance.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   
It's already been done. This info would never be out in any portion, if TPTB's scientists, long ago, from Keely, Tesla's days on, didn't have all this stuff under their belt. Anything you can conceive they have already researched and conceived and anyone who thinks otherwise is not thinking straight and doesnt understand the Power Grabbers at the top.


Sonoluminescence - Cavitation - NanoGeometry & The Future of Technology (See Vid Description)

First 8 minutes of this gives us what cold fusion really is: cavitation, star in a jar and pistol shrimp, and the bubble that reaches the temperature of a star. And in both those cases, it was a sound wave that stressed the atoms and caused them to release energy.

So its already been perfected, and what has happened.


This still goes on



This still goes on



This still goes on



www.stopthecrime.net...

Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars, pretty much explains it. They have been in an undeclared war against humanity for decades. Even nuking us and poisoning our food and water.

From that doc:



---p.5 All science is merely a means to an end. The means is knowledge. The end is control. Beyond this remains only one issue. Who will be the beneficiary?

In 1954 this was the issue of primary concern. Although the so-called "moral issues" were raised, in view of the law of natural selection it was agreed that a nation or world of people who will not use their intelligence are no better than animals who do not have intelligence. such people are beasts of burden and steaks on the table by choice.

Consequently, in the interest of future world order, peace and tranquility, it was decided to privately wage a quiet war agains the American public with the ultimate objective of permanently shifting the natural and social energy (wealth) of the undisciplined and irresponsible many into the hands of the self-disciplined, responsible and worthy few....


---p.17 Since most of the general public will not excercise restraint (AND THEY PREY TELL, ARE DOING THAT THEMSELVES....OR SHOULD NOT THE ENERGY COME OUT AND ABUNDANCE/FREEDOM. MY 2 Cents added!), there are only two alternatives to reduce the economic inductance of the system:

1. Let the populace bludgeon each other to death in a war, which will only result in a total destruction of the living earth. (Gee what are “they” doing to the living earth and its oceans???/)
2. Take control of the world by the use of economic “silent weapons” in a form of “quiet warfare” and reduce the economic inductance of the world to a safe elvel by a proces of benevolent slavery and genocide.


It discusses that they are in a race of time as they realize the public will in a few decades realize what is happening and also that the very ENERGY they now have that helps them will free the public as well.


Big Brother has been using all our info, all our data, sales items, food, clothing, home, purchases, conversations, beliefs, everything gathered. All data gathered and put in their super computers to analyze so they can block and enslave us on every path, overload us to breaking, and defeat us.

GET IT!
THAT IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED.








edit on 19-8-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 02:15 PM
link   
So let me chime in and say the following

People should really stop this mentality of "What if a no western nation develops it" The effort and expertise required to put together a reactor capable of sustainable and 'over unity'... ie power generation using fusion has been a long long road and has been developed collaboratively for many years.

en.wikipedia.org...

These guys (and girls) are the ones building the next generation reactor which, according to calculations should break even and then some. The JET project was able to get to the 65% mark, and ITER is designed from first principles to be able to sustain a positive power reaction.

Will it be profitable? Probably not, because much as to be done to develop the techniques, materials and designs to get the best possible configuration.

So Who will discover it? it will be the EU, India, Russia, China, South Korea, Japan and the United States, all will discover it simultaneously. Will the technology become avaliable to all those nations once perfected and cost reduced... yes... will those nations begin building reactors of their own... yes

When? unknown.


I think that nothing will really change in the grand scheme of things. The overhead to produce a plant will be large and the energy companies selling the electricity will pass that onto the consumer. The area that i think would be a huge boom will be in power storage.
edit on 19-8-2013 by ErosA433 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   


It's already been done. This info would never be out in any portion, if TPTB's scientists, long ago, from Keely, Tesla's days on, didn't have all this stuff under their belt. Anything you can conceive they have already researched and conceived and anyone who thinks otherwise is not thinking straight and doesnt understand the Power Grabbers at the top.
reply to post by Unity_99
 

Yes, it has been conceived, and yes, fusion of a sort has been accomplished, but only for a split second, and with great effort. The trick is to develop a repeatable, continuous stream of fused atoms, that is efficient and that has not been done. However, great efforts are going on, and I believe it will happen in my children's time. As for distribution of the technology, once it has been perfected in a controllable environment and become practical, it will be like the atom and hydrogen bombs. The technology will get out, whether by publication, leaks or spy, and will spread quickly. I also agree that generation of electricity will be the first application, and unless some huge leap is made, the scalability will take considerable more effort and time.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Im a bit doomy on the initial impact of this technology. Even just a peer reviewed paper would damage the global economy.

Thinking along the lines of the petrodollar and oil futures if there were less demand for barrels there could be less use of the dollar ine the future

The ME would be devalued as a region and futher conficts could arise.

The coal industry and the countless thousands employed within would be decimated.

But at least we'd stop empowering and enriching nations hostile to the US with our dollars for their energy supply.

Im actually hugely in favor of a newer cleaner and safer energy production and distribution. ..but I do worry about the potential of very rich and influential people to act harshly and treacherously to ensure the longevity of Their wealth and standard of life at the cost of us the 99percent.



posted on Aug, 20 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by balanc3
 

You have touched on some of the issues that I hoped would come up in this thread. The technology WILL come, and it is only a matter of time, and once it has been proven effective, there will be a stampede for it, certainly among 1st world nations. At that point, a major retooling of technology and employment will take place. It will certainly bring a lot of uncertainly among the populace.





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join