Jump to content

Michio Kaku on Fusion + additional video ( mechs are born )


43 replies to this topic

#41 LogicalTightRope

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 146 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina, USA

Posted 18 June 2012 - 07:42 AM

View PostSkylarr, on 16 June 2012 - 10:56 PM, said:

Not sure about this. After the problems that happened in Japan many reactors are slated to be shut down.

1. Those are fission reactors. We have no fusion reactors that produce more energy than they use yet, so that incident is irrelevant.
2. Far more people die every year in coal plants than nuclear; despite the bad press, nuclear energy is the safest, and it doesn't pollute the air (although it does produce some nasty waste, but that's not getting into the water or air. The 'smoke' over nuclear reactors is water, nothing more).

Fusion would solve the nuclear waste issue - correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that the products of fusion will be either stable or decay much faster than plutonium, making it far more convenient than fission.

#42 Aesaar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 237 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 18 June 2012 - 08:14 AM

Mechs the size of those in BT will never be viable combat vehicles. Tanks can do almost anything a mech can do while being cheaper, faster, easier to maintain, better armored for their weight, and better able to absorb weapon recoil. Mechs might be able to serve as light recon because of their better ability to handle really rough terrain, but that's about it.

Mechs are cool, but real military organisations (unfortunately) can't run on the rule of cool.

Edited by Aesaar, 18 June 2012 - 08:30 AM.


#43 CCC Dober

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,881 posts

Posted 18 June 2012 - 08:18 AM

The real deal will probably not be the mere existence of fusion reactors. If ITER goes as planned we'll see the first DEMO reactors going online in a 'couple' of decades. That's childs play compared to portable fusion reactors. We want to see them in space eventually or any other means of transportation and that includes the BattleMech. It'll become a real challenge to downsize a working fusion reactor and still have it produce sufficient energy. And then you need some means to conveniently store a lot of energy in order to kickstart the whole thing. At the rate our current technological progress crawls, we're looking at the year 2100 to get anywhere near that goal.

Edited by CCC Dober, 18 June 2012 - 08:21 AM.


#44 Dragonsbane

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 85 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 18 June 2012 - 08:22 AM

View PostDonglord, on 17 June 2012 - 12:11 AM, said:

I was laughing at the guy who thinks the Japanese are going to shut down all their fusion reactors for being really dumb but wow you're good at it too!

You guys are confusing FISSION reactors (he ones we use today) with FUSSION ones (not viable today but being researched).





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users