dreamer_easy: (science)
dreamer_easy ([personal profile] dreamer_easy) wrote2006-01-11 09:50 pm

(no subject)

Last year I found out, while critting someone else's SF, that fusion reactions create radioactive waste. As I was one of those SF readin' teens who grew up thinking of fusion power as the Philosopher's Stone, this was a shock, and I wondered why I hadn't learned it before. (Or was I busy writing fanfic during that lecture in first year chemistry?)

Two letters in the 3 December 2005 New Scientist reminded me of this discovery, but the editor has some reassuring facts: the fusion reactor would only be a tenth as radioactive as spent uranium rods; and the materials would have a much shorter half-life ("The radioactivity of a fusion reactor is predicted to drop by a factor of 10,000 within 100 years, compared to a factor of 5 for a conventional nuclear power plant.")

A more serious problem is that it may be decades before any fusion reactor will be up and running (and I heard on the radio today that it will be a decade before "clean coal" technology is available). We can't afford to wait - clean power is available right now, this house is running on it, and cutting down the amount of power we actually use is often as much a matter of will as of technology.

[identity profile] stephanielake.livejournal.com 2006-01-15 05:15 am (UTC)(link)
What sort of tech is your house running on?

[identity profile] kateorman.livejournal.com 2006-01-15 05:37 am (UTC)(link)
It R teh GreenPower. (Sorry about the netspeak, it's the drugs talking.)