You're Wrong About Nuclear Fusion
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 окт 2024
- Helium-3 is touted as an unlimited clean source of energy, but is it all it's hyped up to be?
A huge thank you to KhAnubis! Be sure to check out his accompanying video here:
• Will There Be Borders ...
Support me:
Patreon - / thebeardypenguin
Streamlabs (for donations) - streamlabs.com...
Socials:
Music channel - / @picardieofficial
Discord - / discord
Twitter - / beardypenguin
Music:
Light Years by Stellardrone
Link: stellardrone.b...
License: creativecommon...
Centum Celebration by Mikael Hellman
Link: filmmusic.io/s...
License: filmmusic.io/s...
Sources:
[1] Kikuchi, M., Lackner, K., Tran, M. (2012). Fusion Physics. [pdf] International Atomic Energy Agency. Available at: www.iaea.org/p... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[2] Miyamoto, K. (2016). Plasma Physics for Controlled Fusion. 2nd edn. [pdf] Springer Link. Available at: link.springer.... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[3] IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans (2012). Radiation. Lyon (FR): International Agency for Research on Cancer. Available at: www.ncbi.nlm.n... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[4] Making It Work (2023). International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. Available at: www.iter.org/s... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[5] Fuelling the Fusion Reaction (2023). International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. Available at: www.iter.org/s... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[6] Rubel, M. (2019). Fusion Neutrons: Tritium Breeding and Impact on Wall Materials and Components of Diagnostic Systems. Springer Link. Available at: doi.org/10.100... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[7] Pistunovich, V., Pigarov, A., Busnyuk, A., Livshits, A., Notkin, M., Samartsev, A., Borisenko, K., Darmogray, V., Ershov, B., Filippova, L., Mudugin, B., Odintsov, V., Saksagansky, G., Serebrennikov, D. (1995). Membrane pumping technology for helium and hydrogen isotope separation in the fusion reactor. [pdf] Science Direct. Available at: doi.org/10.101... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[8] Fuel Cycle (2023). International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. Available at: www.iter.org/m... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[9] Johansson, M. (2003). Direct Conversion of Fusion Energy. [pdf] International Atomic Energy Agency. Available at: inis.iaea.org/... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[10] Pfalzner, S. (2006). An Introduction to Inertial Confinement Fusion. [pdf] Taylor & Francis Group. Available at: doi.org/10.120... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[11] Yanes, J. (2019). Helium-3: Lunar Gold Fever. Open Mind. Available at: www.bbvaopenmi... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[12] Crabb, J., White, S., Wainwright, L., Kratz, S., Kulcinski, G. (1993). Fifty Years of Research in Helium-3 Fusion and Helium-3 Resources. [pdf] Fusion Technology Institute. Available at: fti.neep.wisc.... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[13] The problems with Helion Energy - a response to Real Engineering (2023). Improbable Matter. Available at: • The problems with Heli... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[14] Wittenberg, L., Santarius, J., Kulcinski, G. (1986). Lunar Source of He-3 for Commercial Fusion Power. Fusion Technology Institute. Available at: fti.neep.wisc.... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[15] Helium-3 is a Meme (2022). Spacedock. Available at: • Helium-3 is a Meme #sh... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[16] Choppin, G., Liljenzin, J., Rydberg, J. (2002). 'Thermonuclear Reactions: The Beginning and the Future'. In: Radiochemistry and Nuclear Chemistry. 3rd edn. [pdf] Science Direct. Available at: doi.org/10.101... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
[17] Magee, M., Ogawa, K., Tajima, T., Allfrey, I., Gota, H., McCarroll, P., Ohdachi, S., Isobe, M., Kamio, S., Klumper, V., Nuga, H., Shoji, M., Ziaei, S., Binderbauer, M., Osakabe, M. (2023). First measurements of pB fusion in a magnetically confined plasma. [pdf] Nature Communications. Available at: doi.org/10.103... [Accessed 12 Nov. 2023]
#NuclearFusion #Moon #ForAllMankind
Thanks for reaching out and giving me an excuse to make a video about space, this was such a fun collab to do!
He3 is nightmarishly difficult to ignite, compared to fusion fuels that are already horrifyingly difficult to ignite
Meanwhile, fission fuel is easy to ignite, has been mature for decades, has virtually unlimited fissile fuel reserves, and has proven to be economical for decades in the right conditions - and yes this includes taking care of waste, this is a solved problem but I'll let others like Kyle Hill explain it.
But what about the initial costs for a reactor you may say? Well if this is your issue with fission reactors, I have extremely bad news about any believable fusion reactor design...
Yep, not gonna be a reality anytime soon while fission is clean, safe and criminally underinvested in. Am also a huge fan of Kyle Hill :)
The point of the video was just that the sci-fi concept of lunar Helium-3 mining isn't a silly one, but it just won't happen this century, if ever.
Eh, I won't kill my hopes for the 2090s. But anyone alive now will be either very old or very dead before it happens, that's for sure.@@TheBeardyPenguin
If it's not hard to do then it's not worth doing. Dang maybe this is the answer to the fermi paradox, we can't find aliens because they all talked themselves out of advancing any farther than lvl 1 on the kardashev scale.
@@killman369547 So you wanna practically waste millions if not billions or trillions of dollars researching fusion instead of spending that money to get reliable and efficient solutions in a couple of years? And what if you’re wrong? What if the aliens did do something like research fusion but because it took them too long to do they kind of run out of time to fix their energy problems? (a similar event to global warming and fossil fuels.)
Fission is the solution for green power generation. If you look into it, most political resistance to fission power in the west stems from KGB disinformation operations in the 60's and 70's. The Soviet's wanted Western Europe dependent on the Soviet Union for the energy to run its industry as they moved away from lignite. France basically was the one country who ignored the KGB.
Keep flexing that degree on us, I genuinely love these videos! ♥
Not a video I expected to come from you, but it's seeing new types of videos from you! Keep it up!
I really enjoyed this educational type video, I would love to see content like this about some you have done in your aerospace engineering classes (also good job on the citations this is something that needs to be done more on RUclips)
Looks like we all are now reaping the benefits of Beardy‘s academic education. I really like the use of citations. Job well done, thank you!
While I love your for all kerbalkind series, and have been a fan of it since the very beginning, I do belive these types of Video, the more educational side, suit your channel extremely well and I think you should really continue with this trend. Have a nice remainign week mr beardy.
Reminds me of when I talked to the dean of a meteorology (weather forecasting) program at a university. Turns out we don't know how water vapor or hurricanes work, despite being two of them most studied components of weather. Sure, we understand the broad strokes, but we constantly witness events that aren't explained by any of our current computer models or theories.
I'm absolutely loving this new style of video you're working on
A lot of these points, believe it or not, I feel is what one of my fav games was trying to emphasize when playing it, that game being Anno 2205. It followed the process (granted in the sense of monopolizing the whole process) we as humanity has been slowly undertaking to reach near infinite energy, and it's not easy, but once you get set up, it's hard to say you aren't going to be benefitting from it in the long run.
First, I salute you for ending on a bad pun.
On the helium mining; It's soooo much easier to extract tritium from heavy water that was used in HWRs, then waiting for it to decay.
Bad news about lunar He3: it is way, way too sparse to ever be worth mining, it is in fact not even remotely close.
But don't take my word for it, here's the paper talking about it:
Nuclear Fuel Resources of the Moon:
A Broad Analysis of Future Lunar Nuclear Fuel Utilization
Gerrit Bruhaug, William Phillips
I'm not sure why we'd need a large human presence on the moon to sustain the mining operations. Between teleoperation from earth and just, ya know, *robots* I'm pretty sure we can manage it with just a few people there as troubleshooters. The scenario in the Moon movie you cited is a bit extreme in that direction, I think, but we won't need to go full For All Mankind either.
Of course, I'ld like us to go full For All Mankind, but oh whale. Great video!
I really enjoyed this. Thank you for teaching me something new!
I'ma need that video on Hal thrusters the idea that we don't really know how it works sounds really interesting
It's certainly interesting to theorize about what D-He3 fusion could do for us in a century, but I think it's just as important to think about what we'll learn along the way by researching plasmadynamics, DT-fusion, lunar life support and ISRU, etc.
Who knows if power generation will even be a problem in the 2120's, or if we'll have developed other technologies that make fusion powerplants redundant.
In the 1920's we had just invented the television, now we have AI-generated TikToks in our pocket. Technology on time scales like that is unpredictable and that's probably going to be more true for the next 100 years, than it was for the last.
But even if our news and entertainment doesn't come from a miniature cathode ray tube, researching the underlying science is never a waste.
only on youtube can you listen to an anthropomorphic penguin with a substantial amount of facial hair talk about nuclear physics
You can easily make Helium 3 in an energy positive way very easily… given enough time.
Take a fission reactor and fill it with lithium and beryllium. The beryllium will act as a neutron multiplier, and that will take one neutron from the fission reactor, and turn it into multiple neutrons for the lithium. L6 breeds with lower energy neutrons than L7, but is less abundant, so vary your beryllium content according to your isotopologues.
Lithium 6 is the only light element to release energy on fission, so it just works as a fuel rod in your fission reactor. Lithium 7 will absorb energy, but also release a neutron which you can later use to fission something else.
The result of your lithium fission will be Tritium. Useful in a DT reactor, but if you wait 12 years, half of it is now Helium 3. So if you have a very forward thinking attitude, and a commitment to both fission and fusion, you can make Helium 3 pretty easily.
A flaw in that plan is just how rare and expensive beryllium is. Though that's another resource the moon is rich in, so it could lead us down the same path of lunar mining ;)
It also doesn't solve the radioactive waste issue. Although that's very much a solved problem (I defer to Kyle Hill on that subject), as far as I can tell that's the only worthwhile perk of fusion over fission.
@@TheBeardyPenguin I'd have said the bigger problem is how incredibly nasty beryllium is, and how toxic lithium isotope separation is.
Plus the whole 12 years wait, but if we are committing to embracing fission, then we will have plenty of depleted uranium to make getter beds.
DT fusion is still being developed even though it's terminally dependent on neutron multipliers. Theoretically it could be done by layering L7 and L6, but getting a breeding ratio of over 1 like this would be very difficult.
Compared to mining THE MOON I don't think the cost of beryllium is very prohibitive. You could say that the cost of space exploration will come down, but so will the cost of refining beryllium.
There are some very smart people here 😂
If only there was a giant fusion reactor somewhere nearby that we could tap a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of a percent of its power output to run all our stuff from…
blud really be describing a medium sized star center to a solar system which includes a planet which holds a creature that is us
Just started taking aerospace courses this semester i cant wait to have a large enough knowledge base to be able to teach myself these things
Lets go beardy upload
Some Helium-3 has been found in the Canadian shield near Hudson's Bay. I don't know how much there is, but it's certainly more efficient short term than mining in on the moon
One other issue I have heard about the current deuterium tritium reactions currently being chased is that if they were to enter full production, every design today would run through the entire human supply of tritium in a few seconds meaning its entirely reliant on the correct D-D reaction to sustain itself.
Praise the gods! Beardy uploaded today!
This day just got multiple times better
I work in a russian lab doing projects for the ITER, thank you for the video!
Great video, love your sources and related videos. While fusion technology is very cool I'm not too broken up about it being in the realm of sci-fi for now because, like you mentioned, there's lots of other viable ways of generating clean energy and one even directly captures it from a giant fusion reactor. Plus it lets writers and other creators get funky with it.
THANK YOU for making this video. I understand Fusion power history fairly well. I know the basics of a Tokamak reactor but I didn't understand how H3 was involved in a fusion reactor. I knew the basic chemistry of a Deuterium/Tritium fusion reaction. Every other video I checked out about H3 just explained how a fusion reactor basically works and then just says "H3 makes it work better" but doesn't say how or why. Now I have a basic understanding of WHY H3 is important for fusion power. I mean with a H3 reaction you can use direct energy conversion technology like a MHD Turbine (for example). I love how you said "the human search for better ways to boil water 😂😂😂 its so true! I also would get kind of angry when videos say traditional fusion power is clean and doesn't generate nuclear waste. While you don't have spent fuel rods, you still have components exposed to high doses of neutron radiation over long periods of time. Of course you have nuclear waste generated when you would decommission a deuterium/ tritium reactor.
So thanks for a video that was actually informative!
I would love to see a playthrough of the ksp1 interstellar extended mod. You could try to have a somewhat realistic progression so that you can both explain how stuff works in ksp1 and how it would work in real life, with these kind of video's in between.
This video also gives some insight why some reactors in the mod give thermal heat and others make charged particles. Thanks!
I already played through KSPIE in Endurance and Beyond Kerbol
Mining He3 on the Moon. Like mining spice and just as fanciful.
Your content is always great to watch. I did notice something though. I wanted to rewatch your old To Boldly Go series, but no videos existed when i searched for it. If there is a way to bring back these old videos somehow, that would be wonderful. Love your channel.
That series is unlisted now as I wanted to move away from that kind of let's play content
The playlist is still public though, so if you go onto my channel page you can still watch it through that
I am also continuing development of the modpack, which I will be doing a new series on over on Carnasa's channel at some point
Thank you!
Good. Now I don’t feel so bad about not understanding how Hall effect thrusters work.
I just did the math: 20t of He3 can power the US for one year, the lunar regolith contains 1000000t of He3, which means you would have to extract the He3 of 760km² (!!!) to power the US for one year. That does not sound feasable. 🤔
That’s less than the area of many counties in the US. That sounds very feasible now that you say it. We take the whole ass tops off mountains for their coal; excavating a few meters of surface regolith for helium-3 sounds fine to me.
Upvoted purely for the pun at the end
More of these types of videos please! :)
(Also more of the old KSP content of course)
I see fusion research as a worthwhile persuit to further our understanding of material science, magnetic systems, engineering and high energy matter simulations. also tons of creative ideas in that space. if you want a practical solution fission is better tho. but it has a bad reputation out of inherited, well cultivated irrational fear.
I love Fusion and fission. It’s just so interesting
I can't figure out one thing about thermonuclear reaction. If the Sun is a giant fusion reactor why doesn't it just explode? Why and what makes it to burn at steady rate instead of bursting like H-bomb?
Its own gravity balances out the radiation pressure
Turns out I wasn't wrong about He3 fusion
Love this style of video!
What was your degree in? I remember some colleagues at University doing a presentation on Tritium fusion - they had me pretty sold!
I'm skeptical about getting hold of Helium and the idea of harvesting from the moon is terrifying. Sounds to me like the most likely catalyst to start WW3 - I was kind of hoping the moon would be classed as a 'no-exploitation' zone a bit like Antarctica, otherwise it's going to get very messy, very quickly.
Also, IMHO I think by the time we have the technology to bring harvest and ship resources from the moon en masse we would already have well established renewable energy supplies. Yes it's difficult, but at the end of the day we need to stop burning resources in general. Like you said, we have a great big fusion reactor in the sky, let that do the hard work and we can live off the radioactive and kinetic energy that creates (albeit, it will be a long way down the road until we are in a position to be supplied 100% by that renewable strategy).
What do you think? Not a proponent of renewables being reliable for 100% of energy supply?
But we’re healing 3 we are finally get self-sustaining one.
Another question I have is simply what advantage does fusion have over fission? Aside from its bad reputation, the main real drawback of fission power is the high costs, which I don't fusion fixing anytime soon. Nuclear waste may seem concerning, but very little of it is produced and there are ways of dealing with it using fast burner reactors.
I do think that it will become a thing in a decade or few
Beardy I think I also know y helium 3 is an attractive fuel source, because no shocker it is abundant on the moon. Now the question how can that energy be used in a fusion reactor. I am not an expert in fusion reactors, but can he3 be trapped in a reactor? Sorry beardy I ain’t an here.
Penquin (probably) had to flex his PhD doing this video 😂
/J
8:12 about the writing... So we will have to create a mini sun on the Earth?
I'm expecting a video on why we don't understand the Ion thrusters and why they shouldn't work to follow this one in relatively near future.
I loved this. Think you can point me in the right direction for me to go learn more about this?
Edit 1: Wanted to elaborate a little more, what books do you recommend reading and what videos should I watch on the subject?
I have a list of sources in the description which are a good place to start
A good number of them are free, the Fusion Technology Institute ones are particularly interesting
9:05 You MUST be dad... seriously! there's no way, otherwise...
Talking bout the big Fusion reactor in the Sky. I think just building orbital solar panels is better. I am by no means anti fusion, but fusion should stay a power source where its needed, not to consume the bulk of power.
I’m not sure neutron activation is nearly as big of a problem as you make it out to be. We have decades of experience from research reactors, commercial fission power plants, and facilities like RTNS-II at LLNL in engineering reactor materials that resist neutron activation and embrittlement. Much of that research was done specifically for D-T reactors. The concentration of 3He on the Moon is also abysmal-some 50ppm at the very best-such that the Icarus and Daedalus projects considered them infeasible to mine, even in the far term. From what I’ve read, the consensus seems to be that we’ll have to make due with D-D and D-T (or even just fission) for the foreseeable future.
To be fair, though, I’m no expert. I’m planning to major in nuclear engineering when I transfer to a 4-year university, but I haven’t actually taken any classes in it yet. All my understanding comes from reading things like Atomic Rockets, Centauri Dreams, ToughSF, and watching the occasional public lecture, so I could very well be misinformed.
Edit: also, artificial production of 3He, through D-D fusion or otherwise, does not necessarily need to break even energetically to be useful. Even as an energy storage mechanism rather than a primary fuel, it could be valuable for fusion in space, where restraints on mass (especially for shielding and radiators) could make D-D and D-T cumbersome. D-3He fusion rockets also have a much higher theoretical ISP than most other reactions, which is why they were preferred for designs like Daedalus.
I would like to say some things:
2:04 I think you should perhaps have clarified that the waste generated is not exactly equivalent, it does not have transuranics and of course won't have fission products either, being comprised of low-level waste
5:20 There is something weird here. The paper (from 1986) is based on a lunar concentration of 36ppm of helium-3 down to 2 meters, however if we use the "best case" current value of 50ppb (and ignoring that this is permanently shaded regions and hence won't allow for sunlight use as stated in the paper,) and transform it to ppm we get 0.05ppm, or 720 times less helium-3. Now of course, if you were to actually use sunlight as the paper recommends and decrease the concentration to 15ppb (best case) we get an awesome 2400 times less helium-3 than is assumed.
With our current manufacturing methods, Beryllium (the material of choice for the ITER blanket) actually contains a non-negligible amount of Uranium-238, so it does turn into high-level radioactive waste after sustained neutron bombardment.
With regard to the second point, could you tell me where you got those refined estimates from? That's a mistake on my part if I used outdated estimates, the 1986 paper used the Apollo samples to calculate its figure. At the end of the day we won't truly know how much is up there without significantly more exploration and sampling though.
HE LIVES
Where is For All Kerbal Kind?
This is good shit.
I like this.
HES ALIVE!
What are your thoughts on deuterium-lithium-6 fusion? As far as I’m aware the reaction is also aneutronic and lithium-6 is minable on Earth.
wtf with this low watch number.... algorism do your thing!!
This is something i got to revise for mocks tomorrow lol RUclips dose count as revision
May I suggest, that since the point of fission and fusion is to make heat to boil water, why not skip all the nuclear enhanced stuff and design a long, cylindrical steam powered generator that can be lowered down into the crust to where the heat is enough to boil water? This does not even require getting to the mantle. Places on Earth with naturally thin crust (like Iceland) have an advantage. If such a system can be designed to cost less than space based and fossil fuel based power, the advantages are immediately observed. Sincerely, a retired middle grades science teacher.
🎉
In addition, the amount of mass released as energy is as follows...
*Neutronic reactions:
Deuterium-deuterium - 0.0973%
Deuterium-Tritium - 0.375%
*Aneutronic reactions:
Proton-boron - 0.081%
Helium3-Helium3 - 0.23%
Dueterium-Helium3 - 0.39%
So, for example, if you could fuse 1 kg of deuterium in a deuterium-deuterium reaction, then the mass released as energy (in the form of the motion of the resulting particles) will be 0.0937% of 1kg; or 0.937 grams.
You would think the most attractive reactions would be ranked by energy released. No.
A full 80% of the energy released by deuterium-tritium reaction is in the neutron released, making it hard to extract the energy as well as being an excellent method turning normal materials radioactive.
It is far harder to fuse helium3 with deuterum than it is to fuse deuterium to deuterium. Meaning a reactor meant to use the helium3-deuterium reaction will use up the deuterium in the D-D reacrion more quickly than you can get the He3-D up and running. (However, it might be possible to bootstrap some side He3-D reactions in an over-clocked D-D reactor to boost total output. This is called the "catalyzed deuterium-deuterium reaction." But its also a hard ask.)
The He3-He3 reaction isnt just tough to get going and maintain. The outgoing particles are also at a wode spectrum of energies, making the engineering of the electro-magnetic generation grid rather tough. Dr. Bussard complained about this in his Google Tech Talk in 2008, "Should Google Go Nuclear? No, Seriously." That on top of all the other issues, some presented here.
And the deuterium-deuterium reaction, while being relatively easy to create and maintian (D-T being the only one easier) it also has a neutron problem.
By far the most attractive reaction from this near-term list is proton-boron. It's aneutronic, is easier than He3-He3, uses relatively abundant fuel and exhausts He4 nuclei of very narrow energy, making it easier and more efficient (theoretically) to collect energy from.
Which is why so many firms are touting it as the reaction theyre aiming for.... Its still orders of magnitude harder to achieve than fusion with deuterium.
14mev neutrons are very easy to turn into power.
They are going to hit something and that thing is going to get hot.
It's also extremely useful, because those neutrons are used to breed the tritium, which, if you are using predominantly lithium 6, is energy positive. So you just have to extract heat from the breeder blankets.
The neutrons that make it past the blankets and hit the magnets or sensors are a massive problem from an engineering standpoint, but from a power extraction standpoint it's pretty easy. Temperatures also work very well with a supercritical CO2 Baryton cycle (boiling water is a bit of an oversimplification in the video, probably because Beardy is a fresh graduate not someone who's worked in fusion).
@HALLish-jl5mo
While all the engineering you speak of is perfectly possible, not only to implement but to make reliable, it is far from easy. Indeed, I would tout it as an example of excellent engineering that makes lemonade out of lemons.
Fast, 14MeV neutrons are not trivial to engineer around.
Possible? Yes.
Easy? No.
Worth doing? Yes, if required.
Worth avoiding? If possible, yes please.
And while CO2 is the new fun, steam is old reliable. Yes, CO2 is probably more efficient and has a smaller footprint, but we don't know yet about maintenance or long term reliability. Also, it somebody's "intellectual property" for which you have to pay for the privilege to use. And while I do not begrudge the inventors their right to make money from their invention, needing to buy it to use is a consideration not in its favor. We shall see if it can replace our obsession with water.
Do you really think it will take a century to have heavy resourcing on the moon?
We'll have it by the 2050s.
togheter with a new episode of for all kerbalkind
Wasn't he helium on the moon disproven?
Problem solution : Using fission reactor... come on guy!! Fusion is cool and all but praise Atommm
what about other aneutronic fusion? like hydrogen-boron reactor? can you make videos of it?
Think H-B is fairly difficult to ignite.
where is the kerbalkind series?
i came from that other video
Wasn’t there a news article about scientists getting more energy out of a fusion reactor then they put in?
The reaction itself produced more energy than it consumed. However, the lasers required to produce the energy are much, MUCH less than 100% efficient, so the amount of energy required to actually run the reactor was much higher than the amount produced. Worse, capturing the energy output is also
I mention it in the video ;)
To be fair to the National Ignition Facility, it was built 20 years ago and it was never designed for power input efficiency. It’s an experimental device for studying plasma physics, more similar to the Large Hadron College than a development reactor like ITER.
They got a Q of >1.
But that's a plasma physics number. The energy released by fusion was greater than the energy absorbed by the fuel. Cool. But the energy required to run the lasers was orders of magnitude more than the energy absorbed by the fuel, and the total electricity generated was 0 watts.
It's generally accepted that a Q of 10 is needed to generate enough electricity to break even in terms of electrical generation (and that's in a Tokamak, inertial confinement is a complete dead end), and more like 20 to be actually useful in a power station.
Basically we need a burning plasma, which is a goal of ITER
holy wow give me that ion engine video
Boron...funny.
Amazon same day helium 3 shipping
WHeRe Is FoR aLl KeRbAlKiNd?!?!
Man I hope they colonize the Moon soon so we can clone Sam Rockwell 😉
Background 'music' ☹️
well it will be once stable comersnal nuclear fusion reactor become a thing. but it will be only the most plentful as a nuclear fusion and fission byprotuct bescue the moons cust simply doesnt havenm baerly any for nuclear fusion reactor in the first place. also it will take some time before we can make the nuclear fusion reactor efecant. it is just moslty alot of trail and error at this pont to fugre out the nuclear fusion efectacly sweet spot.
a gaming-youtuber tries teaching science ...
Nobody batted an eye when folks like Scott Manley and Marcus House did the same thing
Comment for algorithm
🤦🏻🤦🏻🤦🏻 You are
A quick search finds that planned fusion development is being done to avoid long term radioactive waste. So comparing the waste from a fusion plant to the waste from fission plants is completely disingenuous!
It is worth saying that there is an issue. But neglecting to say that it is a much simpler problem makes me question how much your video is agenda driven over science driven.
Really great video, but I disagree on two points:
Nuclear fission produces ridiculously clean energy. Real Engineering has a great video on safe ways to dispose of the radioactive waste
Solar panels suck. Trust me. I live in Texas, everyone has them on their roofs, but in twenty years they will expire and cannot be recycled, not to mention solar farms take up enormous amounts of land that could otherwise be farmed for food or used as a wind farm, or both at the same time (I’ve seen it done)
Regardless, great video, thanks for including sources! This post made by Matt Lowne gang
Lmfao, solar panels are ridiculously efficient and take up very little space. If you are concerned about land use in Texas, animal agriculture is a much bigger concern.
First
Well, I think humanity should invest much more into solving our current problems that worrying about whatever problems we might have in 100 years. At the current rate, I'm pretty sure civilization will be gone in 100 years...
And honestly, I see absolutely no point in colonizing Mars, why should we try to move to a barren rock in space, when we're literally living in paradise?
Capitalism will have made our species extinct LONG before we can even CONSIDER mining He3 on the moon lmao
So will any power structure
Do not take anything off the moon the heck is wrong with you?!
“Muh capatalism will kyill errbody!” No it won’t, although it destroys the environment, ruins culture and takes advantage of the already unfortunate for a few dollars, There’s no way it’ll get in the way of itself. Especially the mining of resources on the moon.