Skip to main content

Week 12 [12-18.06.2017] The energy of future

World’s reserves of fuel are going to be exhausted in about 50 years. It’s also predicted that the gas and the coal resources will be used up in about 60 and 220 years. The demand for energy in the world still grows. It’s time now for mankind to take care of next generations and provide them with new energy sources which will not damage our environment and which will be efficient. It’s time to harness the energy of stars.

iter_main.jpg
https://ec.europa.eu/research/sse/2011/index_en.cfm?pg=fusion

Fusion energy
Fusion is the process in which light nuclei fuse together to form heavier ones, is the energy source of stars. The sun fuses hydrogen to form helium. In thatreaction, about a half of a percent of the hydrogen mass is converted into energy, as described by Einstein’s famous equation E=mc2 , which relates mass and  energy. This energy escapes as light, almost all of which is lost in the depths of space. Less than one part in a billion falls on earth, where it has sustained the water cycle, wind and life for billions of years.

Fusion on Earth
Hydrogen atoms in the sun and stars fuse at very high temperatures and under the extreme pressure    cause of gravity force. In principle, fusion is possible to carry out with many light elements. Among all possible reactions, the fusion of deuterium and tritium (two isotopes of hydrogen) is the easies to achieve and has been chosen to the basis for future fusion power plants. In the process, the deuterium and tritium are converted into helium and a neutron, and a lot of energy (about 17,6 MeV).

525172-48bbb9c40341669e8ab0a438d10d6f71.png
http://fusionforenergy.europa.eu/understandingfusion/



Pros of fusion energy power plants

  1. No CO2 emission – greenhouse gases as we all know, changes the climate. It causes the rise in the global temperature, changes in precipitation patterns, and a rise of the sea level. A fusion power plant doesn’t emit such gases. If the fusion programme is successful, fusion could start to contribute in the second half of century.
  2. A sustainable energy source – safe and environmentally responsible energy source, with a Widely available and secure fuel supply. Once developed, it will have the potential to play a major role in energy production, alongside other energy generation technologies.The fuel is practically inexhaustible (every cubic meter of water contains 33 grams of deuterium, the tritium can be produced form lithium which is one of the most abundant light metals in the earth’s crust ),
  3. Very small amount of fuel needed - only 100 kg deuterium(from 2800 cubic meters of sea water) and 150 kg of tritium(from 10 tons of lithium ore) will be needed to operate a 1000 MW electrical power plant for one year, instead of 2700000 tons of coal during the same period.
  4. No harmful radioactive emissions – primary materials for fusion (lithium and deuterium) are not radioactive and can be transported easily. The tritium which is the radioactive fuel component is produced inside the machine itself in a lithium-containing blanket surrounding the plasma. The neutrons released by the fusion reactions react with the lithium in the blanket, transforming it into tritium. In this way the only radioactive fuel component is both produced and burned in the machine in a closed loop. Tritium has to be transported during the start-up and decommissioning only.
  5. Small amount of “ash” – inert gas helium. Exhaustive safety studies have shown that a fusion power station can be operated without risk of radioactive releases harmful to humans and the environment. No evacuation will be necessary beyond the area of the power station because of limited amount of tritium that could be released.
  6. Small quantity of fuel inside and quick shutdown - the total amount of deuterium and tritium in the plasma is tiny: the weight of plasma vessel would be about the same as ten postage stamps. It could be turned off quickly – like a gas burner.

Comments

Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Magdalena Popek said…
Nuclear energy is the safest, the most ecological and most efficient one. The problem with the energy described in the article is the word "nuclear". People are afraid of it due to its unpleasant association.
It really sounds like the energy of the future. We need to find the most efficient ways to use the Earth's shrinking resources and this one seems to be a perfect solution.
Unknown said…
Very interesting topic but I was wondering about cold fusion which has all the benefits of nuclear fusion but with much less uncool issues (ah the pun). Unfortunately this process/technology is similar to AI in an aspect that we hear about it since xx years and that it's coming but after those xx years we are still behind. I hope we will solve it cause,
only the holy grail of physics can save us! Praise the science!
Andrzej Gulak said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
We need to wait.
Like the introduction of nuclear energy in the 1950’s, some other new form of energy may arrive or some existing technology may be redesigned to suit the large scale needs of society. The environmental lobby may also vote nuclear energy out for the fear of hazardous radiation effects.
Also there is always the high potential of nuclear fission energy which is yet to be introduced into the society making it to dominate the other energy forms. So, as I said, we need to wait:)
Unknown said…
Oil is still in the world and people will not make another type of energy as long as possible. I think that every oil company has alternative way . In my opinion hydrogen engine is the future. I saw somewhere on the internet man who made water engine. I think that we will see energy evolution. Cars companies withdraw diesel engines. This is a big step.
Unknown said…
I believe that in the future humanity would find some viable ways of producing energy, as they already have discovered how to create gold (maybe not very quickly, however, at least they get the idea) and diamonds (nearly the same as original ones, only not cutting other stones).
Here's the video about gold: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf_4z4AKwJg&t=202s
Unknown said…
I am not into chemical science, but when I have read the pros it is obvious for me, that fusion energy is an energy of future. If it could save our planet, no harmful for humanity and animals, I hope it will become more and more popular. The problem is people, who's business is gas and oil would do their best not to let it happen. And it is very sad, because many great technologies are dead because of someone's business and capital. But let's hope for the best, maybe our children and grandchildren will live in another world on a green and safe planet.
KamilG said…
Interesting topic, I've searched Internet to find more informations about this and as Piotr said, this idea is still in a research phase. Anyways, I cross fingers to invent an effective way to produce and store this energy, because it's very needed. I think also that except researching and developing these ideas, we should support people in putting solar panels, promote hybrid, electric cars, because every "green" energy allows us to use less energy from power plants.
Humanity needs to find other source of energy and replace the internal combustion engines. If we want to live on our planet we need to reduce the polution, and changing the way we produce energy right now is a big step. Fusion energy seems to be a good solution. I heard about engines fuelled with water, but I don't know about it efficiency.
I believe that nuclear energy is our future it needs a fewer amount of resources than coal, it doesn't emit so much pollution into the air. It's just much more efficient than old ways of getting power. Of course we need to take care about the remains from nuclear reagents but it's much easier than amount of pollution and wasted resources we are producing right now.
It's definitely a future, or at least good enough until we find something better. Decreasing pollution is the first thing we should consider when generating more energy, and nuclear plnats are definitely one of the most eco in terms of efficiency and cost.
Wojtek Kania said…
I think that the future of energy is eco energy. It comes from wind, sun, water... I think we don't need nuclear energy.
Nuclear power plants are very dangerous, at least that's what I heard. For me this topic is very difficult to understand, because I never liked chemistry or physics. I believe other sources of energy like volcanic energy would be better alternatives in the future.
Ihor Ahnianikov said…
I've read about the nuclear fusion before, if scientists manage to maintain it for a long time it will be a revolution for the energetic industries of the world. I think that nuclear energy is pretty "green" if it's respected and handled properly. Although I'm glad that alternative sources of energy in Europe are on the rise right now and burning coal in 21st century is a bad idea I think that nuclear fusion is a much more powerful source.
Bartosz Łyżwa said…
It's clear that nuclear energy is the most ecological power. I don't think so that nuclear power plants are very dangerous, of course there were incidents when one mistake made big disaster but if I'm true - those dangerous situations were made by common irresponsibility.
Maciej Główka said…
Very interesting article. I hope one day our country will see, that coal energy isn't so good for us. Unfortunately, every government don't want to start a war with miners... I think that switching to green energy is inevitable. Quicker we do it, will be better for everybody.
Unknown said…
I agree with Magdalena. People are afraid of word "nuclear" because of what happened in Czernobyl and they are blind for arguments and don't want to get to know the facts, how it really is.
In my opinion eco energy is the future. The problem might be that not every country has same eco energy potential. There are countries that may produce a lot of solar energy on the other hand some countries may produce wind energy efficiently.
Panharith said…
I think that switching to green energy is inevitable. Quicker we do it, will be better for everybody.



Goldenslot สล็อต
goldenslot mobile

Popular posts from this blog

Week 1 (09-15.03) VOD

http://www.vod-consulting.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/1.jpg

Week 11 [03-09.06.2019] The problem with ecological cars emission in UK

The problem with ecological cars emission in UK Since the adoption of the European Emission Allowance Directive in the European Parliament, all car makers have tried to submit. Since 1992, the Euro I standard has been in force, which limited the emission of carbon monoxide to the atmosphere. The Euro VI standard currently applies, which limits the series of exhaust gases. These include: hydrocarbons, nitrogen and carbon oxides, and dust.   The most significant change was brought by the Euro IV standard. For the first time it introduced the limitation of nitrogen oxides, which are responsible for the harmful compounds of smog.   What is smog?   Smog consists of sulfur oxides, nitrogen and carbon. In addition, solid substances such as suspended dust (PM). Dust suspend in atmospheric aerosols may be in liquid and solid form. These can be particles of sea salt, clouds from the Sahara and artificial compounds made by people. These compounds often come fr

Week 4 [06-12.11.2017] This is what happens when you reply to spam email.

James Veitch is a British comedian. In today’s Ted Talk James with characteristic for himself a sense of humor shows how he deals with spam emails and why responding to junk messages may be sometimes dangerous. Questions: What do you think about James’s  way of dealing with spam? Why are junk messages legal, even though it sometimes may be a fraud? Dou you have a problem with spam? How do you deal with with it?