Arguments Against Nuclear Fusion

As the worlds population continues to grow, the energy demand will also increase posing an important question as to how will we keep up with the demand, and which source of energy will be the most efficient and be a better source for human sustainability. Fuel for nuclear energy is abundant and is derived from the fission of uranium and plutonium. It meets the definition of sustainable by being able to provide energy for long time periods without depriving future generations; it releases very little greenhouse gases, is less expensive, and is a reliable form of

Presently, nuclear fusion and nuclear fission are being studied, and even used in some countries as a power generator. The enormous energy produced by nuclear fission and fusion could light up a big city for a hundred years or more and we do not have to worry about it polluting our environment because nuclear energy is a green energy. Moreover, in a long term, the cost to generate power using nuclear is far less than the cost of generating power using fossil fuel.

Repercussions of burning oil have arisen more progressively. The debatable topic of global warming holds burning fossil fuels responsible for higher temperatures in colder climates. An article by World Book explains why oil is so harmful towards the environment. As more cars are produced more pollutants are released into the atmosphere, those pollutants cause smog in larger manufacturing oriented cities as well as, acid rain. Factories, burning oil, dispose of the remaining chemicals into bodies of water rendering them unsafe to drink for both humans and animals alike (Hunt par. 1). Another article produced through World Book describes the

The vast majority if our current energy needs are met with fossil fuels like natural gas, coal, and petroleum. It is no secret that these sources of energy are very limited in their abundance and humans have been trying to find viable alternatives for decades. In recent years we have made great strides in renewables such as solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, and much more. But what about a seemingly infinite source of energy that would make even the most efficient of our current sources seem like child’s play in comparison and that has the potential fuel source to run solely on isotopes of the most abundant element in the universe? Nuclear fusion has the potential to meet all of our current energy need in the foreseeable future and much more.

Science is a measurement of true knowledge to the world and for some is a bragging front to show the amount of intelligence and power some countries have. Through certain aspects of science, countries can demonstrate any amount of dominance they have by demonstrating new technologies and theories. Fusion and Fission is one of the great explorations that man has discovered due to the benefits it brings to human life. The promise of fusion is enormous due to how big of an energy system it gives and it comes together by fuel that is obtained by seawater and is also mixed with lithium from the earth’s crust. Most people get Fission and Fusion confused and they figure that it is the same thing.

Utilizing nuclear energy to combat climate change is a disputable improvement. While some trust it is a smart thought to help our struggle in global warming. Some trust that it is excessive, and perilous to store when used up.

Nuclear fusion differs from fission in that fusion is when two atoms are smashed together, and fission is when atoms are split in half. Conventional nuclear reactors have always been fission and this is one of the first fusion reactors. “Nuclear fusion has the potential to produce nearly unlimited supplies of clean, safe, carbon-free energy. Fusion is the same process that powers the sun, and it can be realized in reactors that simulate the conditions of ultra hot miniature “stars” of plasma — superheated gas — that are contained within a magnetic field” (“New Record for Fusion”). This means that there could be a very good alternative for conventional nuclear power. Be that as it may, this technology is far from becoming a needed replacement for nuclear energy. This technology will benefit others years down the line, but for right now, it will stay in its experimental

Currently, nuclear power is harnessed in the form of nuclear fission reactors. These reactors account for roughly 10% of the world’s current energy consumption. However, nuclear fission has proven to be a very volatile process as it produces large amounts of undisposable radioactive waste. Given that fossil fuels are unsustainable in the near future and nuclear fission is a hazardous source of power, nuclear fusion is a promising alternative. Fully optimized fusion reactions are four million times more efficient than fossil fuels and oil. Secondly, a nuclear fusion plant, predicted within the next 20 years, would only consume 250 kilograms of DT reaction fuel per year compared to 2.7 million tons of coal in a coal-fired power plant. Also the byproducts of a fusion reaction are significantly less harmful than those of a fission reaction, which are extremely radioactive. Fusion reactions produce smaller amounts of waste and the radioactive half-lives are much shorter.

It is estimated that at today’s rate of consumption, the earth has about fifty years left of fossil fuels. In contrast, due to the very small amount of uranium needed to create a huge amount of energy, the supply of nuclear energy is almost infinite [Jiskha].

Millions of people displaced, starving, and fighting each other to survive. This is the future of humanity in a world ravaged by climate change’s effects. This problem is so large in scale that even prevalent technologies, such as solar and wind energy, will be unable to save us from natural disasters, increasing temperatures, and rising sea levels. Arguably, the only possible solution to the largest problem facing humanity is nuclear fusion. Able to provide limitless energy to the world’s population without emitting radioactive or greenhouse gases, fusion may be our glimmer of hope in a future of ecological crisis.

These fossil sources are the biggest origin of CO2 production – the main cause of a worldwide climate change. Renewable sources offer an enduring, clean energy holds, however, they produce a small amount of energy, leave an expansive natural impression and their variances in time require capacity frameworks and reserve energy plants. Nuclear fission present a demonstrated option yet creates extensive radioactive waste that requires transportation and re-preparing. On the contrary, Fusion reaction will be accessible as a future energy choice by this mid-century, and could add to a supportable, secure and safe source. Nuclear fusion can possibly give a manageable answer for American and worldwide energy needs. Fusion could begin providing business power in around 30 years, and it is likely to supply up to 20% of the world's power needed by the year 2100. Its points of interest incorporate not radiating any CO2 gasses, effective energy, copious fuel sources, safe frameworks and no seemingly perpetual radioactive waste (“Fusion for

Fusion energy research has proved problematic and there is the risk that commercialised fusion energy may just be impossible. Fusion researchers have been conducting experiments since the 1970, yet they have been unable to create a fusion power plant cable of producing a higher net energy than the amount required to start the reaction for over 40 years. This leads to another dilemma which is the current timeline of fusion energy. The ITER, is currently aiming to demonstrate 500MW of fusion energy for 400 second currently states that the first plasma will not be created until 2025. The deuterium-tritium operation will not begin until 2035. This means that commercially viable magnetic confinement fusion will not be commercially viable until at least 2050. This is also assuming the ITER results go according to plan.

Carbon dioxide represents 84% of greenhouse gases. It is not only affecting the atmosphere but also the oceans in that it has made them 30% more acidic in turn affecting sea organisms. As you can see these fossil fuels create a chain effect damaging more than we are aware of. One of the biggest problems with switching to renewable energy isn’t that we couldn’t make it work or the startup cost is too much, it’s because, as most people agree, the oil businesses doesn’t want to lose out on the money. The oil industries made 1021.1 billion dollars in the past ten years. A lot of the world depends on oil production, but it is causing severe damage to our environment. There is a massive amount of land and forests being destroyed in order to get this oil, and the effects of the leaks and spills on the earth and to living things extremely damaging. Just in 2010 there were two reported massive oil spill starting on January 23rd, spilling 462,000 gallons and again on April 20th with 20,000 gallons a day spilling for 87 days ending with over 200 million gallons being spilt of off the gulf of Mexico; this is the worst oil spill in American history. The impact of the spill on the environment was devastation killing many sea organisms and birds. And the effects did not go away after the oil did. Many organisms became sick and about 17% of the dolphins affected did not survive. Sea turtles became stranded including 500 endangered sea turtles. The oil spill happened during many organisms

The fact that so much oil is being taken out of the ground is causing problems because the more that is being taken out the higher the prices will be. According to the Toronto Star “We’re going to have a massive crisis as the cheap petroleum runs out” (Zerbisias3). As the prices increase the more conflicts will arise between countries. All of the oil being exported is majorly used for the transportation and production of energy in other countries. All of hydrocarbon molecules that make up crude oil and petroleum products are highly toxic to many organisms, including humans. The Maclean’s journal states that “ If everyone in North America started driving hybrid cars tomorrow, it would contribute just a fraction of the overall reduction needed to cut global emissions 50 per cent by 2050” (Colin2). If everyone around the world would drive hybrid cars it would make a big difference in the world. All of the toxins being released by the crude oil are of the main reasons why global warming is getting worst and worst as time goes by.

Human existence and activities have proved to contribute immensely to the warming. When oil was first becoming a major world energy resource, greedy capitalists actively pursued any and all measures to profit from it. The expansion of embryonic corporations became the single most superior motive, forgetting completely about the care of the planet. All aspects of oil production, including the: extraction, refining and transportation generated considerable amounts of environmental pollution. Oil spills from international transportation became a major concern and in 1990