By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Moving from fission to fusion is the Holy Grail of nuclear energy

An interesting short article on nuclear fusion. I thought it might be worth posting.

 

Source

Moving from fission to fusion is the Holy Grail of nuclear energy

 

WILLIAM REVILLE

 

NUCLEAR FUSION, which promises the clean production of virtually limitless energy from readily available raw materials, is the Holy Grail of research that hopes to find a viable successor to the generation of energy from fossil fuels. However, developing a fusion reactor is proving to be a tough nut to crack and may take much longer than originally expected. The current state of play in nuclear fusion is described by Michael Moyer in the March edition of Scientific American.

 

Conventional nuclear power, nuclear fission, is based on the break-up (fission) of the heaviest naturally occurring element – uranium atoms. Nuclear fusion, on the other hand, means the joining together (fusion) of atoms of the lightest natural element – hydrogen.

Nuclear fusion is the process that takes place in our sun when hydrogen atoms fuse together to produce helium, releasing enormous amounts of energy in the process. In order to build a nuclear fusion power plant, therefore we must reproduce the enormously high temperature and pressure that exist in the interior of the sun, and these conditions must be safely maintained over long periods in the nuclear fusion power plant.

Two approaches are being used to achieve fusion. One relies on lasers and the other relies on heating a magnetically contained plasma.

The National Ignition Facility (Nif), a 13-year, $4 billion enterprise at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, California, will start fusion experiments later this year. The Nif will bombard pellets containing two heavy varieties of hydrogen (deuterium and tritium) with the world’s most powerful laser beam.

The laser energy will crush the pellet so forcefully that hydrogen fusion will occur, releasing much energy.

Fusion has been achieved before, but more energy was used to generate the lasers than was released during fusion. It is confidently expected that Nif will reach the point where fusion energy output exceeds the input energy.

The second major fusion facility, a $14 billion project in southern France, named Iter, is scheduled to be built in 2018, and to start deuterium-tritium fusion tests in 2026. Iter will heat hydrogen, using microwave radiation, to 150 million degrees, creating a highly mobile state of matter called a plasma (a sea of electrically charged atoms). Electrically charged particles are affected by a magnetic field.

The hot plasma will be contained by a magnetic field generated by superconducting magnets, and fusion will occur.

Unlike the intermittent laser bursts in Nif, it is hoped that the magnetic field will hold the plasma together for up to hundreds of seconds, producing a sustained burst of fusion.

So, that’s where we are now – trying to ignite the fusion process and k eep it going for a short while.

But, remember, in a working nuclear fusion plant the fusion must be maintained continuously, year in year out. The core of the fusion plant must also be able to withstand extremely high temperatures year after year, and to withstand long-term bombardment from high-energy neutrons generated in the fusion process (this bombardment turns ordinary material brittle).

Another problem is to source a continuous supply of tritium, one of the two reactants in the fusion process. The other reactant, deuterium is available in limitless supply from sea-water. Tritium can be made in a conventional fission nuclear power plant at a rate of 2-3kg per year and at a cost of about $100 million (€74m) per kg.

However, a fusion plant will consume a kg of tritium per week, so to supply tritium from a fission plant is not a practical proposition.

The fusion plant must be designed to automatically generate a sufficient supply of its own tritium. In theory, this will be done by allowing the high-energy neutrons generated in fusion to bombard a surrounding blanket containing lithium. The neutrons will induce lithium to split into helium and tritium, and this tritium will replace the tritium used up in the fusion reaction.

Tritium generation must proceed with the greatest efficiency, otherwise the fusion process will wind down and stop. The formidable technicalities of tritium supply have yet to be worked out. We are surely a long way from building a fusion power plant.

At current rates of progress, the construction of the first demonstration nuclear fusion plant may not begin until around 2100.

But Nif director Edward Moses has proposed a compromise plan to develop a hybrid fission-fusion plant that could be connected to the national grid in 20 years – a laser inertial fusion engine (Life).

Only 5 per cent of the uranium that goes into a fission nuclear power plant gets used up before the fuel is withdrawn and stored as high level radioactive waste. Life would use neutrons from laser powered fusion to bombard this spent fission fuel, causing fission reactions and producing heat that would be used to generate electricity.



Around the Network

Tritium is one of many ways to do fusion. There are actually more favourable methods that produce fewer neutrons (good) but they require even higher ignition temperatures.

Fuel sourcing isn't the problem; containment is. The victory here will be for materials science.



What's wrong with fossil fuels?



Soleron said:
Tritium is one of many ways to do fusion. There are actually more favourable methods that produce fewer neutrons (good) but they require even higher ignition temperatures.

Fuel sourcing isn't the problem; containment is. The victory here will be for materials science.

That's not even the last hurdle either.  ITER should be sufficiently large/powerful to achieve scientific break-even, but economic break-even will be even further down the line, probably not before most of us are retired...



oOoo cool! I like the idea of fusion, its an awesome technology. However its going to be years away from a realistic implementation.



Tease.

Around the Network
De85 said:
Soleron said:
...

That's not even the last hurdle either.  ITER should be sufficiently large/powerful to achieve scientific break-even, but economic break-even will be even further down the line, probably not before most of us are retired...

Once we achieve the former though, there will be massive commercial interest. I think there will be a rapid pace of development, because tens of companies will realise it is viable if only they manage to make it cheap, and they'll all want to have a monopoly on fusion, since it is green and renewable and reliable and scales well, so it would replace every other form of energy generation (which have at most three of the four).

Look how big the oil market is. What company wouldn't invest a few billion for the certainty (once it's shown to be viable by ITER) of 10% of that revenue?



gurglesletch said:
What's wrong with fossil fuels?

Not to get all hippyish, but...

 



Soleron said:
De85 said:
Soleron said:
...

That's not even the last hurdle either.  ITER should be sufficiently large/powerful to achieve scientific break-even, but economic break-even will be even further down the line, probably not before most of us are retired...

Once we achieve the former though, there will be massive commercial interest. I think there will be a rapid pace of development, because tens of companies will realise it is viable if only they manage to make it cheap, and they'll all want to have a monopoly on fusion, since it is green and renewable and reliable and scales well, so it would replace every other form of energy generation (which have at most three of the four).

Look how big the oil market is. What company wouldn't invest a few billion for the certainty (once it's shown to be viable by ITER) of 10% of that revenue?

I agree. As soon as fusion shown to be technically viable, every energy company will want to be the first to adopt it. Then the race to make fusion commercially viable will underway.



That article had too many long words for the likes of Sam.

This talk is brilliant at putting fusion down in layman's terms:

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/steven_cowley_fusion_is_energy_s_future.html



SamuelRSmith said:
That article had too many long words for the likes of Sam.

This talk is brilliant at putting fusion down in layman's terms:

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/steven_cowley_fusion_is_energy_s_future.html

Ahh! TED, I think I could literally waste days of my life on the TED website...