Solar Pipe Dream

RE: Fusion power

Well, I don't agree with you in the argument that nuclear fusion power plants are an impossibility. I do agree with you in how you put the way "fission" powerplants work. Plasma (the state of matter at which fusion reactions take place) forces negative ions and positive ions on separate sides, if you could find a way to inject those negative ions into a powerline, you could be dealing with LOTS of power. How to contain a superheated reaction with no physical container (Cryo-Magnets, cough cough) and how to directly harness that power are the most important tasks in fusion power plants. Of course you could ditch all that crap and use antimatter instead which is the most effective way of producing energy (e=mc^2 at 100% converting matter into energy=LOTSA POWER) but we would have to find a way to profitably harvest enough anti-hydrogen to make it an alternative power source...AND IT IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY OF PRODUCING ENERGY...effective of course in the point of "ergiums of energy per gram of matter" balance.
 
RE: Fusion power

>Well, I don't agree with you
>in the argument that nuclear
>fusion power plants are an
>impossibility. I do agree
>with you in how you
>put the way "fission" powerplants
>work. Plasma (the state
>of matter at which fusion
>reactions take place) forces negative
>ions and positive ions on
>separate sides, if you could
>find a way to inject
>those negative ions into a
>powerline, you could be dealing
>with LOTS of power.
>How to contain a superheated
>reaction with no physical container
>(Cryo-Magnets, cough cough) and how
>to directly harness that power
>are the most important tasks
>in fusion power plants.
>Of course you could ditch
>all that crap and use
>antimatter instead which is the
>most effective way of producing
>energy (e=mc^2 at 100% converting
>matter into energy=LOTSA POWER) but
>we would have to find
>a way to profitably harvest
>enough anti-hydrogen to make it
>an alternative power source...AND IT
>IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY
>OF PRODUCING ENERGY...effective of course
>in the point of "ergiums
>of energy per gram of
>matter" balance.

Well you've got to remember that if we could do a direct energy to electrical energy transformation, our current powerplants would be able to produce all the energy we want.

But since we rely on using heat to make steam to produce power, we lose a whole lot of energy. Even if we were able to convert matter purely into the energy, what would we do with it? Make steam?

What we need is a better way to move electrons. When it comes down to it, no matter where we tap our energy, we always need to use the old methods to convert it into electrical energy. Think about all that wasted energy that goes out as steam from the nuclear power plant chimneys. Wasted energy. We rely on an inheritly wasteful heat engine to make electricity, that's where the problem is.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Fusion power

You are right...hmm...even if by some irony of fate (not that I believe in that but for lack of a better word) I could create a toroidal, magnetical container to store that superheated plasma...I bet those old school guys would then use it to heat water which in turn produces steam...yadda yadda yadda....hmm...a more direct way to extract energy...ok...let's do some brainstorming here ladies and gentlemen...propose some way of directly extracting energy...that is, using the energy contained in all fuels without burning it, using it to make steam...you get the point...I hope...
 
I don't know the reason why the plant melted down, but it could have been avoided. The reason they could not stop the meltdown was because the emergency shutoff button was stolen. Ha! Probably one of the workers figured that no way in hell the plant would fail, and probably took the button as a souvenir.

http://members.home.net/civildefense/standups/fallout.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top