Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Hunterson7's avatar

The money squandered on the search for fusion energy could have been used to make a lot of things that actually work, like a lot of fission reactors. Or to improve fission reactors. Or burn coal cleanly.

Instead we have to spend the money on a proven failure and confessed deception, fusion. Like the money spent on wind, solar and carbon capture, it is a profligate waste.

Has anyone researched hat has been done with 70 years of failed fusion devices? A pictoral history of building what has been in effect a bunch of sci-fi movie props wo I ld be fascinating.

Expand full comment
David B. Miller's avatar

I just had a thought: attempts at fusion so far involve attempting to hold gaseous (or plasma) H2 in place through ongoing fusion reactions. But U is arranged in a matrix of solids as UO2, using fluids (H2O or Na) to attenuate neutrons and remove heat. Why not embed H2 in something solid? Can fusion occur without intense heat? I suppose not. Out of the box doesn’t always work.

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts