0
Why havent humans been able to build a fusion reactor?
AdriannaMonique
We have not been able to build a stable, controlled fusion reactor because of the problem of confinement. In order to sustain a fusion reaction, we need to hold the fuel together. That requires tremendous energy in order to overcome the electromagnetic force that would otherwise cause the various nuclei to repel each other, and in order for the residual binding energy (nuclear force) to initiate fusion.
In the Sun, that is easy. Gravity does it. Problem is, that a reactor large enough to use gravity would be larger than the Earth and would destroy the Earth.
Its not a "problem" with an uncontrolled fusion bomb. We have that technology perfected. The "problem" is doing so in a controlled fashion, and we have not been able to do so for more than about 500 milliseconds.
Other methods are being explored, such as inertial confinement and magnetic confinement. Magnetic confinement is the basis for the Tokamak, which is the foundation of the ITER project in France. There are substantial technical issues involved, and we do not expect first plasma production until 2019, with end of project slated for 2038. Even then, we are only talking about 500MW thermal output for 1000 seconds, based on 50MW of input power, with no production of electricity - all at a cost of around 100 billion euros.
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What are the three main advantages of a fusion reactor compared to a fission reactor?
Nuclear fusion reactors do not exist yet as we don't know how to build them. All nuclear reactors are nuclear fission reactors.
How close are you to producing thermo nuclier fusion on earth?
Artificial fusion has been achieved already. In fact it has been done in different ways. The problems with fusion include how to achieve it without consuming more power than is produced, and how to keep such a reaction going. The Farnsworth-Hirsch fusor is a fusion reactor a student might build as a project, but it sufferes these problems. Another problem with fusion is that many of the methods tried are expensive to test. The polywell is a reactor with such a problem. It is the result of many years of experimentation by Robert Bussard. According to Dr. Bussard, the polywell worked briefly before the apparatus burned out. Unfortunately he lost funding, and then died, and the effort is slowed as a result, so we do not actually know he was right. So the answer might be that we already have achieved practical fusion. We just have to determine that it is true. Or the answer might be that we have not achieved practical fusion, and if that is the case, it might be years or decades away.
Why do you use fission reactors not fusion reactors?
No way has yet been found to reach break-even in a controlled fusion reaction and get as much energy out as was needed to put in to start the reaction. To make a reactor you need to go past break-even and release extra energy.
What are the advantages of a fusion reactor compared to a fission reactor?
You must realise that any claimed advantages are based on scientists predictions, and to some extent wishful thinking, as it is not even determined in engineering terms how a nuclear fusion plant could be built, what materials could be used, and how the heat would be extracted. However ever since fusion was proposed, scientists have been pointing out that it would produce much less radioactivity than fission does, and this is true, there would not be the spent fuel containing very highly active fission products that fission produces. There would be activation of structures in the plant due to the neutron irradiation coming from the plasma undergoing fusion. There are also consequences from needing to produce the tritium fuel, which is a dangerous substance to human health. So it all depends on future progress with ITER and further test rigs, but at the moment it is academic since it is very unlikely to happen within this century.
Why do nuclear reactors have to be located near water?
Water is used as coolant in most reactor plants to keep the reactor cool and prevent over heating. They do not necessarily need to be near a source of water; water just has to be available. However, a lot of nuclear reactors are build by a natural source of water so that the water can be used as an emergency source of coolant to keep the reactor covered with water in case of a rupture.
Is there an artificial sun?
Not yet, but people are trying to build a fusion reactor.
What percentage is nuclear fusion used in the US?
0% No country gets any of its energy from fusion as nobody has figured out how to build a controlled fusion reactor.
What are the three main advantages of a fusion reactor compared to a fission reactor?
Nuclear fusion reactors do not exist yet as we don't know how to build them. All nuclear reactors are nuclear fission reactors.
Why do scientists want to build a nuclear fusion reactor?
The expectation is that fusion reactors will provide large amounts of energy, and that they will be relatively environmentally-friendly.
Does nuclear fusion occur in nuclear reactor?
No. "Reactors" contain fission reactions. No useful way of containing fusionon an industrial scale outside the laboratory has been developed yet.Edit: Tomak fusion reactors currently produce 10 times the energy that is put into them. The historical increase into the gain of fusion reactors has bettered the increase of capacity of DRAMs. The only reason that that it "isn't out of the laboratory" is because when you build a fusion reactor, it is usually called a laboratory.
Can you use the energy produced by nuclear fusion for something?
Sure, you can get a tan from it, since the Sun is a big fusion power reactor. In the near future we will be able to build fusion reactors here on Earth. Google "ITER" to see how it's going. In the meantime I suppose you can say the fusion power is actually solar energy.
Scientists hope to build a nuclear fusion reactor fueled by?
Ocean Water
Are nuclear fusion dangerus?
Well, fusion bombs are, but fusion reactors should not be (if we can build them).
Why have humans not yet been able to build a fusion reactor?
We have as yet been unable to sustain a stable fusion reaction long enough for this to work.
Can you build a small reactor?
Yes I can. But doubt you could
How close are you to producing thermo nuclier fusion on earth?
Artificial fusion has been achieved already. In fact it has been done in different ways. The problems with fusion include how to achieve it without consuming more power than is produced, and how to keep such a reaction going. The Farnsworth-Hirsch fusor is a fusion reactor a student might build as a project, but it sufferes these problems. Another problem with fusion is that many of the methods tried are expensive to test. The polywell is a reactor with such a problem. It is the result of many years of experimentation by Robert Bussard. According to Dr. Bussard, the polywell worked briefly before the apparatus burned out. Unfortunately he lost funding, and then died, and the effort is slowed as a result, so we do not actually know he was right. So the answer might be that we already have achieved practical fusion. We just have to determine that it is true. Or the answer might be that we have not achieved practical fusion, and if that is the case, it might be years or decades away.
Who was the italian immigrant who helped build the first atomic reactor?
Enrico Fermi
