It’s not a quote, just a reality for non-existent blanket recycling technology and dealing with neutron energies that far exceed anything fission produces in slow neutron reactors and the large amounts of waste created from spallation and tritium handling.
It’s not particularly long but it’s very much in Superfund abandonment territory when you look at the economics of that “recycling” of low grade radioactive waste. I mean look at how much higher the cost per target is in this presentation alone for internal confinement is based on their kilowatt hours with recycling included. And that’s not including the reprocessing and production costs of targets or the fact that rapid target replacement will just frankly break as high energy neutrons and ablation screw up internals.
Recycling is definitely an important aspect of developing the technology to a maturity where it forms part of a power grid. But it’s not beyond the wit of man. If we can crack Q>5 for nuclear fusion, surely we can crack economically viable recycling for LLW. I don’t think it’s worth abandoning research on fusion over this issue.
I don’t think it’s worth abandoning fusion research. I just think we’re much farther than popsci ever portrays and I have serious problems with the no waste framing.
100% agree. I hope to be alive to see it. Popsci would have me believe it’s coming any day now.
I kind of get the no waste framing, since the nuance is too technical for most people to bother with. If we say anything more complex than three words about waste, then we will lose public support for fusion. It’s still not right, but I see a greater cause in that lie than the increase in clicks which is the driver for the lie that it’ll be ready tomorrow.
It’s not a quote, just a reality for non-existent blanket recycling technology and dealing with neutron energies that far exceed anything fission produces in slow neutron reactors and the large amounts of waste created from spallation and tritium handling.
I understand there’s no waste with a half life >100 years, and the activated steel can be recycled a few decades after commissioning?
https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/P_1356_CD_web/Presentations/Thursday/Morning/El-Guebaly SESE-KN-2.pdf
It’s not particularly long but it’s very much in Superfund abandonment territory when you look at the economics of that “recycling” of low grade radioactive waste. I mean look at how much higher the cost per target is in this presentation alone for internal confinement is based on their kilowatt hours with recycling included. And that’s not including the reprocessing and production costs of targets or the fact that rapid target replacement will just frankly break as high energy neutrons and ablation screw up internals.
Recycling is definitely an important aspect of developing the technology to a maturity where it forms part of a power grid. But it’s not beyond the wit of man. If we can crack Q>5 for nuclear fusion, surely we can crack economically viable recycling for LLW. I don’t think it’s worth abandoning research on fusion over this issue.
I don’t think it’s worth abandoning fusion research. I just think we’re much farther than popsci ever portrays and I have serious problems with the no waste framing.
100% agree. I hope to be alive to see it. Popsci would have me believe it’s coming any day now.
I kind of get the no waste framing, since the nuance is too technical for most people to bother with. If we say anything more complex than three words about waste, then we will lose public support for fusion. It’s still not right, but I see a greater cause in that lie than the increase in clicks which is the driver for the lie that it’ll be ready tomorrow.