Thurisaz Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Linky No idea whether that's true indeed, I only just got pointed to the article... but if true then YAY 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjn Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Katastrophe! Atomkraft ist tot, nicht war?I actually found a year old issue (late 2014 I think) of a science magazine lying around with an article that covered something similar, and it seemed like true fusion was not far away at all. I was kinda blown away, because I haven't heard anything about it. I also recall some Italian team making progress in that field a few years ago. Hopefully we'll have a few generators up and running within the near future. Provided, of course, that the fossil giants do not oppose it. I love nuclear, it's really the best option we've got, and fusion? That would be truly awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 Well fusion (if they manage to get it to work) would be a very different animal compared to the accursed fission power plants. Conventional nuclear plants are very clean, I'll grant you that... as long as all goes as planned. But if life told me one single lesson then it's this: No matter what it is, humans will fuck it up if they can. And as we've seen in Chernobyl and Fuck-u-shima, that's when it becomes a disaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjn Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Chernobyl was 30 years ago, and in the Soviet Union. Three Mile Island was overhyped, and Fukushima was hit by a frickin' tsunami in a geologically unstable area. The Baltic Sea hasn't experienced anything close to a tsunami since it was called the Ancylus lake (at the end of the last ice age or so), so German and North European reactors on the coast should be kinda safe as far as natural catastrophes go. With modern technology and strict safety regulations, there really shouldn't be any problem at all. I hate Merkel for giving in to the irrational post-Fukushima scare. Coal is neither clean nor very efficient.P.S. Vattenfall are a fucking disgrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 My point is that even the strictest security regulations are only worth as much as people's willingness to obey them. Even Chernobyl wouldn't have happened like it did if the fucking engineers had fucking stuck to the defined procedures. Doesn't mean that the reactor design was a good one that would never have failed (it's still a dangerous construct) but what really caused the core explosion was humans thinking they got everything under control, that they know what they're doing, that they cannot possibly fail and can thus screw the regulations. Sideways. And as for Fuck-u-shima, well they built and operated the thing according to the risks known to them. Too bad that mommy nature had more in store than they ever thought. Ironically, it turned out after the meltdown that such monster tsunamis did happen before...they're just so damn rare, understandably. Couple this with the sad fact that you can't just flip a switch with a fission plant and have it go out... the "afterglow" of the reactor still needs to be dealt with for days and weeks, which is what caused the Fuck-u-shima meltdown. They did shut down the reactors good after all. They just couldn't deal with the heat from residual reactions due to the flooding of the lower levels. Compare with, say, a coal-burning plant where you open the vents, let out all the steam, and you're good to go. I've seen it happen from close up once. After that, extinguish the coal fire if you really have to, and you're all done. The only risk I see with renewable power that kind of compares to that of fission is dams which may burst... that's the one thing I'll grant you any time. And a fusion plant... if all else fails, you stop pumping fresh hydrogen in, cut power to the magnets, done. Doesn't even remotely compare to a fission reactor. Fission power is not the answer. Neither is fossil fuels. For the time being, renewable is where it's at, and in the long run I'll keep hoping they do get workable fusion power plants soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 Just found another article on the thing, from a leftist German site. They give the answers I was looking for... apparently they sustained the plasma for 0.25 seconds and reached a bit more than half the temperature they'd need for self-sustaining fusion. Still, one nice step in the right direction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Nuclear fusion device's 1st test with hydrogen declared a success -- http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/technology/nuclear-fusion-greifswald-1.3431541 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjn Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Even though this sort of contradicts what I wrote above, I think I should share it anyways:https://secure.avaaz.org/en/belgian_nuclear_shutdown_loc/?pv=91&rc=fbNever said I was okay with shit like that. I want my nuclear to be safe, not suicidal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts