RE: Hydrogen economy

From: Glenn Morton <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Mon Apr 26 2004 - 18:51:12 EDT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of John W Burgeson
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 2:03 PM

> What we are arguing about is HOW FAST this will happen. Do we
> have another 1000 or so years? If so, interplanetary
> exploration MAY be able to help push the day of reckoning
> forward some. Do we have 100 years? Do we have even 10 years?
> I am in agreement with Glenn that the only known possibility
> appears to be nuclear fusion if we are seriously to consider
> 1000 years rather than 100.

One the plane back from Nashville today I read the latest New Scientist
available in the US (april 10, 2004. It has an article on fusion, by
David King, the UK chief scientific adviser. I don't know how much of
this is politics but it is interesting what he says.

        "That has changed. Experiments at JET, Europes leading fusion
facility based in culham Osfordshire, have now shown tht it really is
possible to create the tempratures needed for fusion, and hang on to
them. The key breakthrough involves manipulating the tokamak's magnetic
fields to generate special regions of the plasma capable of slowing heat
escape from the reactor. Conditions in JET have reached the point where
the power output is equal to the power input. A Japanese tokamak, IT60,
has produced similar results. The next stage is to build a bigger
tokamak to simulate the conditions in a power station and confirm the
feasibility of fusion." David King, "Fast Forward to Fusion," New
Scientist, April 10, 2004, p. 20,

 
That cheers me up. In 1% of the world's deuterium, there is 500,000
times more energy than will ever bee burned by all fossil fuels
combined.
Received on Mon Apr 26 18:51:45 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 26 2004 - 18:51:46 EDT