room temperature fusion

[alvin100]

Can anyone give me a brief explanation of this process.
I understand what goes on in nuclear reactors, but what is the basic difference of the fusion process, and why is it desirable to cause the reaction at 'room temperature'
I assume its do with lack of deadly radiation as a side effect of the energy created.

[mibn2cweus]

Fusion takes place in the core of the Sun where the required temperature and density are produced by the gravitational forces of the Sun's great mass.
Hydrogen nuclei combine into helium nuclei when the repulsive force of positively charged protons is overcome allowing the strong force to take hold and bind them together. In fusion of hydrogen to helium, half of the protons are converted to neutrons and the �extra� energy is released. Four hydrogen nuclei (one proton each) combine to �build� one helium nuclei (two protons and two neutrons).

Sustained fusion that produces more energy than that required to keep it going has not been achieved at room temperature. Development of economical energy production from fusion (at any temperature) is still (after 50 years of research) very problematic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power

[jake-the-peg]

Advantages of Fusion power are: Availability of raw materials ( No uranium / oil /coal mining), No high level nuclear waste, No plutonium production ( causes political issues like Iran and security issues handling it), Safer than fission - no core melt down scenario like chernobyl, no carbon production from running.

There is now a roadmap for workable fusion reactor power stations:

JET - now over - first fusion
ITER - being built in France will pass breakeven
DEMO - Probably in Japan will be first demonstration reactor.

Everybody would love to see 'room temperature' fusion it's just against established laws of physics and there has not been any body who's been able to prove conclusively that it's possible

[Loosehead]

The correct term is "Cold fusion" essentially duplicating the fusion process of the sun but at a manageable temperature. A couple of physicists claimed have done it using heavy water among other things, a few years ago. Turned out to be total cobblers. Still a holy grail for energy production, if we could create a fusion reactor that emited more energy than it needed then we'd have the benefits of nuclear power without the problems. Can't see it happenning though, just too much energy is required up front to get the Hydrogen to fuse into Helium.

[jake-the-peg]

Watch this space then Loosehead

www.iter.org

Jet achieved Q=.6 that is 60% power out compared to power in

Iter is designed for Q=10 ie 10 times as much power out as in.

It's scheduled to be about 10 years to build and you should see breakeven 3-5 years after that

[alvin100]

Ok so its not 'free' energy then, what energy is needed up front to create the reaction (once its perfected obviously)
Are we still talking about burning fossil fuels to make the process happen?