Deuterium and nuclear fusion

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
carburologue
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 183
Registration: 14/05/06, 15:23

Deuterium and nuclear fusion




by carburologue » 21/09/08, 13:21

Hello,

Could someone explain to me the concept of inexhaustible energy that would be nuclear fusion thanks to the deuterium contained in sea water ???

please
0 x
approach the end, we'll all spend ... not kidding ... a little humor is good for morale ...

futuristic saying

Tagor
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 534
Registration: 06/04/07, 12:31

Re: deuterium and nuclear fusion




by Tagor » 21/09/08, 15:56

carburologue wrote:Hello,

Could someone explain to me the concept of inexhaustible energy that would be nuclear fusion thanks to the deuterium contained in sea water ???

please


a possible answer here
http://tpefusioncontrolee.e-monsite.com ... 99719.html
THE CONTROLLED MERGER
The energy produced by this type of reactor presents an advance compared to current knowledge. Indeed the advantages are indisputable.

The most obvious is the almost inexhaustible quantity of fuels which are easily accessible and inexpensive. Fusion uses a mixture of deuterium and tritium as fuel. Deuterim, a non-radioactive isotope of hydrogen, has a very significant energy content (to supply an electrical power of 1000 MW / day, a power station using coal for fuel must burn 3 million tonnes while a power station with fusion would consume only a quarter of a tonne of a mixture based on half of deuterium and on half of tritium, moreover it is present in very large quantity in water: it is estimated to be able to extract from the oceans about 4,6 10 ^ 13 tonnes which would be the equivalent of 5 ^ 11 TWan. It is present in very high intensity in water. Deuterium can be extracted using inexpensive methods of conventional technology. Considering these criteria, this fuel would have the capacity to supply electricity to any terrestrial infrastructure for approximately 150 billion years (see equation previous section).

Tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen, is not available in sufficient quantity in nature for technical applications. It is therefore necessary to create it. To do this, neutrons will be used to generate the Tritium by bombarding a cover around the combustion chamber containing Lithium, according to the following reaction:

- Li + n He + T

It is therefore lithium which makes it possible to produce Tritium. However, Lithium, like Deuterium is a very widespread element. In fact, it has an energy content of the order of 27.10 ^ 15 J per tonne for all terrestrial resources, i.e. 11 million tonnes in deposits on the ground and 200 billion tonnes dissolved in the water of sea. The total resources contained in the soil is equivalent to 9.10 ^ 9 TWan and those dissolved in sea water to 1,7.10 ^ 8 TWan.

Then we can talk about the advancement in security. First of all because the quantity of fuel available at each instant is only sufficient for a few tens of seconds, unlike fission where the fuel necessary for the operation of the reactor for several years is stored in it.

Second, the fusion reactions occur at very high temperatures and are not based on a chain reaction. With any handling error or wrong operation, the internal environment of the reactor cools and causes the automatic stopping of the fusion reactions. Uncontrolled combustion of the fusion fuel is therefore excluded; a large-scale accident of the Chernobyl type is therefore impossible.

The basic fuels (deuterium, lithium) as well as the direct product of the fusion reactions (helium) are not radioactive (not polluting the atmosphere and not contributing to the greenhouse effect and the destruction of the layer d 'ozone), however, permeation barriers should be used to prevent the emission of radioactive tritium into the environment. As it has the same chemical behavior as hydrogen, it can replace it in water and in all kinds of hydrocarbons. It will thus be able to contaminate the food chain if it were released into the atmosphere. The consumption of food and water contaminated with trithium is a danger. But damage is reduced due to the reduced 10-day half-life of trithium.

During normal operation, the dose to which the population surrounding the reactor will be exposed will be a fraction of the dose due to natural radioactivity.

Finally, the investment costs of a fusion power plant (infrastructure) will be higher than current plants, but less expensive and more abundant fuels. In the long term, the cost would therefore be considerably reduced. Fusion energy therefore has a very large number of advantages, but does it have only that?


personally I do not believe that "controlled fusion"
be easy to make ...
scientists are looking for but don't control it yet ...

Fusion energy therefore has a very large number of advantages, but does it have only that?

as a gift there will be waste
0 x
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 5

Re: deuterium and nuclear fusion




by Cuicui » 21/09/08, 18:39

Tagor wrote:personally I do not believe that "controlled fusion" is easy to achieve ... scientists are looking but do not control it yet ...

Hi Carburologist et Tagor
It seems that the continuous deuterium-tritium fusion in a tokamac of the genus ITER is no future because it poses theoretical problems which have not yet been resolved and which prevent it from functioning long enough. On the other hand, deuterium and tritium are expensive. In addition, the reaction produces radioactive waste.
The future no doubt lies in the hydrogen-boron fusion, which is not done continuously by magnetic confinement as in tokamacs, but discontinuously (series of miniature thermonuclear explosions). Fuel is cheap and plentiful. The reaction is not radioactive (therefore no waste), and produces helium which can be used for other applications. An experimental device called z-machine has already produced heat several times greater than that which is necessary to initiate hydrogen-boron fusion.
A prototype of this kind of power plant would cost 200 x less than ITER, but threatens the interests of financiers who have invested in oil and uranium nuclear power plants. And since they also control the major news media ...
To learn more, see the links at the bottom of this post.
Last edited by Cuicui the 21 / 09 / 08, 21: 39, 1 edited once.
0 x
tititaz_21
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 10
Registration: 22/09/08, 16:59

Re: deuterium and nuclear fusion




by tititaz_21 » 22/09/08, 17:09

Hello,

just to show you this interesting line ....

http://www-lmj.cea.fr/html/cea.htm

despite the delay, the end of this project is near ...
a+
0 x
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 5

Re: deuterium and nuclear fusion




by Cuicui » 22/09/08, 18:03

tititaz_21 wrote:Hello,
just to show you this interesting line ....
http://www-lmj.cea.fr/html/cea.htm
despite the delay, the end of this project is near ...
a+

Hi Tititaz_21
MEGAJOULE is a ruinous military program. Like ITER, it will never produce electricity. A fine example of wasting public money.
Recall that no credit is allocated to power plants by hydrogen-boron fusion, much cheaper. They are achievable with current technical means.
0 x

tititaz_21
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 10
Registration: 22/09/08, 16:59

Re: deuterium and nuclear fusion




by tititaz_21 » 22/09/08, 18:40

hello Cuicui

well i don't know if it is really a ruinous program but in any case i am not unemployed thanks to it ... ;-)
all i can say is that for the moment it is very optimistic as results ... laser rating ....
after saying that it will never provide electricity, it is too early to say. maybe it will be the case I'm not a guesser! and I don't have a lot of science either but I understand your reaction in a way.
on the other hand, this simulator could lead to other discoveries ...
thank you for your response Cuicui.
see you soon.
0 x
User avatar
bham
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1666
Registration: 20/12/04, 17:36
x 5

Re: deuterium and nuclear fusion




by bham » 22/09/08, 18:48

tititaz_21 wrote:http://www-lmj.cea.fr/html/cea.htm

despite the delay, the end of this project is near ...
all i can say is that for the moment it is very optimistic as results ... laser rating ....
a+

What are you allowed to tell us more since you are in a good position to tell us about it?
0 x
tititaz_21
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 10
Registration: 22/09/08, 16:59

Re: deuterium and nuclear fusion




by tititaz_21 » 22/09/08, 19:17

I am an electronician and for my part I do not want to be unemployed tomorrow (we had instructions)
electronically I can tell you that the cards are in their second version of routing.
for some we have optimized the electronics and others have been modified due to the change of CDC.
personally I take care of a small part of the design among all this electronics. in addition to the electronics there is all the optical part and the mechanical part thus forming a block which delivers a single beam. this whole block is carefully assembled in a clean room.
voila after when the project is finished I could reveal more by email if it tells you electronic design level .... but I think I have said enough after watching the operating simulation it will explain everything and you will see in reality what that will give ...
good evening to all
0 x
User avatar
bham
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1666
Registration: 20/12/04, 17:36
x 5




by bham » 22/09/08, 19:23

OK thank you tititaz, I would go to the site to try to find out more because for the moment I don't really understand the desired objective.
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9

Re: Deuterium and nuclear fusion




by C moa » 22/09/08, 19:30

carburologue wrote:Hello,

Could someone explain to me the concept of inexhaustible energy that would be nuclear fusion thanks to the deuterium contained in sea water ???

please

The basic principle consists in taking two small atoms to merge them and to make a larger one contrary to the fision which takes a large one to break it into a second a little smaller + a helion and three neutrons.
Generally, we speak either of fusing two atoms of deuterium (a stable isotope of hydrogen), either a deuterium + a Lithium (better because aneutronic), or a hydrogen with Boron .... Other combinations are possible, the principle is that it gives at least one helium nucleus. Most often this nucleus will be unstable and therefore radioactive (alpha particle), hence the creation of waste to be managed. This waste, however, has nothing to do with current waste because it is considered in radioactivity as a large particle and even if it strongly ionizes its surroundings, it can be stopped with a simple sheet of paper and it stabilizes very quickly. This Helion is also naturally present in the environment. This is the main problem linked to the degradation of radon in the granite rocks of Brittany, for example.
The presence of this helion in the nuclear industry since its beginnings makes me say that we will master it without problem (detection techniques and equipment for example have been around for a very long time and are perfectly mastered).

This energy is considered inexhaustible at first because of the phenomenal amount of energy that it should theoretically develop. Then because the resources (deuterium at the head) are naturally present everywhere and in abundance.

Then, two schools "clash" those who think that only hot fusion is possible and those who think that we can also do cold fusion. In fact, the former have enormous means and snub (a little a lot) the latter. However, progress has been made in the two areas which for me are rather complementary.

@Cuicui
It seems that the continuous deuterium-tritium fusion in a tokamac of the genus ITER is without future because it poses theoretical problems for the moment unresolved which prevent it from functioning long enough. On the other hand, deuterium and tritium are expensive. In addition, the reaction produces radioactive waste.
The future undoubtedly lies in hydrogen-boron fusion, which is not done continuously by magnetic confinement as in tokamacs, but discontinuously (series of miniature thermonuclear explosions). Fuel is cheap and plentiful. The reaction is not radioactive (therefore no waste), and produces helium which can be used for other applications.
Can you develop why you think ITER and others have no future? Personally, I consider that nothing is played for Hydrogen-boron fusion. It remains hot fusion and nothing in everything I have read suggests that the technical challenges are less important than those implemented in tokamac.
In addition to advance a figure of 200 x cheaper than ITER when we have not the slightest start of the plan, I find that frankly demago ....
An experimental device called z-machine has already produced heat several times greater than that which is necessary to initiate hydrogen-boron fusion.
A prototype of this kind of plant would cost 200 x less than ITER but threatens the interests of financiers who have invested in oil and in uranium nuclear power plants. And since they also control the major news media ...

It has been a long time since we had had a history of conspiracies .... It is still strong, isn't it? : Shock: : Shock:

The Z-machine is an American tool. ITER was built when the Americans were against it because they saw that the Europeans were going to get ahead.

Do you not seriously believe that they would like to release a product competing with ours ?? If it was so easy, they would have already done it, they are no more stupid than us.
If, in addition, it is 200X cheaper, they could sell it all over the place and that would allow them to solve their energy problems, their external deficit, they would once again be the dominators of the world ...
Overall ITER is 5 billion euros just for construction. 200 x less is 25 million euros. Knowing that a 1 GW nuclear power plant costs around 1.5 billion, they would be well advised to offer this technology to China, India, Germany .... Even by making discounts of 50% compared to at the cost of a fission power plant, they would put their pockets in it until they were thirsty.

Let's be serious, I think that Hydrogen-boron fusion is to be studied but the challenges are as important as for other hot fusions.
0 x


Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 57 guests