This would entirely depend on how many plants were built, and the size of such plants. There would be no limit in principle, except the supply of tritium
If you are asking where does solar nuclear fusion take place, then that would be at the core of stars.
We don't know much about fusion as it is still very experimental. It will not produce the dangerous fission products that fission does, but it may have other dangers unknown as yet. Nuclear fusion has more destructive potential than fission. Fusion is the principle powering the H-bomb developed in the Cold War. Just to put the power of a Fusion bomb in perspective, it is detonated by a fission bomb half the size of the one dropped on Japan. THAT'S JUST THE DETONATOR.
Nuclear fusion normally occurs at high temperatures and pressures. A fusion reaction would melt the container and would have to be suspended by a magnetic field in a vacuum and the container would have to be continually cooled to prevent a meltdown.
It is not possible to give an answer as there is no practical design for a fusion power plant. So far scientists have been struggling just to achieve fusion in experimental apparatus. How the energy would be extracted if and when fusion can be achieved is not known, and to get an idea of its thermodynamic efficiency you would need to know this.
The Sun, like other stars similar to it, is sustained by a Nuclear Fusion Reaction at its core. Unlike Nuclear Power here on Earth, which is created by the process of splitting atoms (Nuclear Fission) Fusion creates energy by fusing atoms together. This has proven a difficult objective to achieve here on Earth - though it occurs naturally in stars, on Earth the problem is containment, a problem that has as yet not found a viable solution. Though the extreme gravity of stars is what initiates a fusion reaction in them, it has been theorized recently that a fusion reaction at smaller levels with chemicals is possible. This is commonly referred to as "Cold Fusion" for the relatively low amount of energy it would produce in contrast to nuclear fusion. Though Cold Fusion has largely been discounted, it continues to be researched. Often the biggest scientific breakthroughs are made by those who do not always hold to conventional scientific beliefs. If we did, we would have never done things like go to the Moon, or broken the Sound Barrier. In the time before it happened, both were considered by mainstream science as "impossible" to achieve.
That would be nuclear fusion, like what happens in stars, when two hydrogen nuclei combine to form a helium nucleus.
In a proposed fusion power plant the fuels reacted would be a mixture of deuterium and tritium, that is isotopes of hydrogen with either one or two neutrons in the nucleus. These would produce helium as end product, plus energy release. Don't understand your last sentence.
Nuclear fusion combines hydrogen atoms into helium atoms. Hydrogen is available from water and helium is an inert gas. When fusion reactors become technologically feasible, we will greatly reduce consumption of limited fossil fuels and production of greenhouse gases. Fusion reactors will not produce high level nuclear waste.
No, that would cool the Sun down, not heat it. It was at some time believed that a CONTRACTION of the Sun would produce heat, and that is indeed possible, but most of the Sun's energy is produced by nuclear fusion - converting hydrogen into helium.
Nuclear fusion.
If you are asking where does solar nuclear fusion take place, then that would be at the core of stars.
One thing is that it would not produce the very active radioactive fission products that nuclear fission reactors produce. However as there is no practical experience yet it is difficult to be sure if there are dangers and risks not fully evaluated yet.
Nuclear energy, which is a kind of potential energy.
We don't know much about fusion as it is still very experimental. It will not produce the dangerous fission products that fission does, but it may have other dangers unknown as yet. Nuclear fusion has more destructive potential than fission. Fusion is the principle powering the H-bomb developed in the Cold War. Just to put the power of a Fusion bomb in perspective, it is detonated by a fission bomb half the size of the one dropped on Japan. THAT'S JUST THE DETONATOR.
Nuking the sun is not possible with current technology. However, theoretically, if it were possible, the sun is so massive that a nuclear explosion would have negligible impact on it. The sun's nuclear fusion reactions are much more powerful than any man-made nuclear explosion.
Nuclear fusion normally occurs at high temperatures and pressures. A fusion reaction would melt the container and would have to be suspended by a magnetic field in a vacuum and the container would have to be continually cooled to prevent a meltdown.
Nuclear fusion requires very high temperatures and immense pressures to start and continue. The problems with a nuclear fusion reactor would be:- 1) the high temperatures would melt the container: therefore, the reaction would have to be stored in a vacuum suspended by a magnetic field and the reactor would have to be continually cooled. 2) nuclear fusion occurs naturally in stars such as our sun: unless the fusion reaction was limited in size in some way, it would be likely that our planet is vapourised by the reaction.