nuclear fusion power : the answer to climate change?

[Mushroom]

And here all along I just thought it was the compressor getting the moisture out of the air to make it feel cooler

Oh, that is absolutely wrong and can be easily shown.

When I lived in the Mojave Desert, most older houses did not even have air conditioners, but swamp coolers. Large boxes that ran water through thick mesh pads, and forced air through it to humidify the house. Just doing that can cool the inside of a house by 10-20 degrees F, with no compressor needed. Just a water pump and fan And they have another advantage in that any large particulates that are in the air (pollen, smoke, etc) outside are trapped in the water and not released into the house. And the large volume of airflow creates a positive air pressure inside, so even with a single unit in the center of a house will get air flow throughout the house simply by opening a window on the other side a crack. And these kinds of units are still common throughout California as the humidity there is generally low.

And yes, I have also lived in humid areas also, where dehumidifiers were a key part. Like in Okinawa, North Carolina, Alabama, and the Middle East. In all of those it was the reverse, and you want the humidity out instead of putting it in.

 

[Stann]

Oh, that is absolutely wrong and can be easily shown.

When I lived in the Mojave Desert, most older houses did not even have air conditioners, but swamp coolers. Large boxes that ran water through thick mesh pads, and forced air through it to humidify the house. Just doing that can cool the inside of a house by 10-20 degrees F, with no compressor needed. Just a water pump and fan And they have another advantage in that any large particulates that are in the air (pollen, smoke, etc) outside are trapped in the water and not released into the house. And the large volume of airflow creates a positive air pressure inside, so even with a single unit in the center of a house will get air flow throughout the house simply by opening a window on the other side a crack. And these kinds of units are still common throughout California as the humidity there is generally low.

And yes, I have also lived in humid areas also, where dehumidifiers were a key part. Like in Okinawa, North Carolina, Alabama, and the Middle East. In all of those it was the reverse, and you want the humidity out instead of putting it in.

Maybe I've got a hybrid then. It looks like the one you've got in the picture. And the guy who installed it says the compressor takes the moisture out of the air to help you feel cooler but the refrigerant in the unit is it actually closed the air down. I think I'll believe the guy who installed it. And my neighbor he said the same thing to me.

 

[Stann]

Maybe I've got a hybrid then. It looks like the one you've got in the picture. And the guy who installed it says the compressor takes the moisture out of the air to help you feel cooler but the refrigerant in the unit is it actually cools the air down. I think I'll believe the guy who installed it. And my neighbor he said the same thing to me.

There was a typo in the above statement when I first wrote it and didn't notice it so I corrected it this time.

 

[Mushroom]

Maybe I've got a hybrid then. It looks like the one you've got in the picture. And the guy who installed it says the compressor takes the moisture out of the air to help you feel cooler but the refrigerant in the unit is it actually closed the air down.

There is no such thing. The unit in the video has no compressor at all, just a pump and fan. And it adds humidity, it does not remove it.

And all compressor based air conditioners dehumidify the air. That is why there is always an outlet point to allow the water removed from the air to escape.

 

[basquebromance]

 

[frigidweirdo]

climate change is already pushing yearly temperature limits into the 110F-120F or 40C-50C range.

the only way to provide cooling, is to take carbon out of the air (for instance through reforesting efforts), and via airconditioning.

however, air conditioners take up a lot of energy, and we'd be foolish to the extreme to get that energy from burning even more fossil fuel.

so i want to bring to your attention a possible solution : government and private investment in the development of nuclear fusion power and reforesting programs.

Nuclear fusion reactor could be here as soon as 2025

The discovery of new superconducting materials has sped up the timeline considerably.

www.livescience.com

Nuclear Fusion Power - World Nuclear Association

Fusion power offers the prospect of an almost inexhaustible source of energy for future generations, but it also presents so far unresolved engineering challenges.

www.world-nuclear.org

ITER - the way to new energy

ITER is the world’s largest fusion experiment. Thirty-five nations are collaborating to build and operate the ITER Tokamak, the most complex machine ever designed, to prove that fusion is a viable source of large-scale, safe, and environmentally friendly energy for the planet.

www.iter.org

However we don't actually know if climate change is happening because it's happening, as in previous hot periods it's got HOTTER than it is now, or if it's because of us.

 

[Batcat]

Yeah there is still no viable containment mechanism for the massive temperature gradient ( 100,000,000 degrees C ) we're talking about. The French have made great strides with magnetic containment but should the containment fail I'm not really quite sure what would happen....even a gram of plasma at that temperature would cause a thermo-nuclear blast in megatons.....sooooo....it's a winner but not yet.

The depends on who you ask and if you trust their answer.

Recreating the Sun: What is nuclear fusion, is it dangerous and when will it be available?

The U.S. is expected to announce a 'major scientific breakthrough,' after reports a federal laboratory achieved a major milestone in nuclear fusion research.

newseu.cgtn.com

One huge worry with nuclear fission is the capacity for a meltdown, as at Chernobyl or Fukushima. However, that type of uncontrolled chain reaction simply doesn't happen with nuclear fusion. "It is absolutely impossible for a Fukushima-type accident to happen at ITER," an official documentation insisted. "The reaction relies on a continuous input of fuel; if there is any perturbation in this process, the reaction ceases immediately."

The disadvantage of nuclear fusion is obvious: it's horrendously difficult to achieve while nuclear fission power plants have been online since the 1950s.

Advantages of fusion

The next decades are crucially important to putting the world on a path of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. By the end of the century, demand for energy will have tripled under the combined pressure of population growth, increased urbanization and expanding access to electricity in developing...

www.iter.org

***snip***

No risk of meltdown: A Fukushima-type nuclear accident is not possible in a tokamak fusion device. It is difficult enough to reach and maintain the precise conditions necessary for fusion—if any disturbance occurs, the plasma cools within seconds and the reaction stops. The quantity of fuel present in the vessel at any one time is enough for a few seconds only and there is no risk of a chain reaction.

 

[Stann]

There is no such thing. The unit in the video has no compressor at all, just a pump and fan. And it adds humidity, it does not remove it.

And all compressor based air conditioners dehumidify the air. That is why there is always an outlet point to allow the water removed from the air to escape.

The one I got drips water so I guess it's a compressor and an air conditioner.

 

[justoffal]

The depends on who you ask and if you trust their answer.

Recreating the Sun: What is nuclear fusion, is it dangerous and when will it be available?

The U.S. is expected to announce a 'major scientific breakthrough,' after reports a federal laboratory achieved a major milestone in nuclear fusion research.

newseu.cgtn.com

One huge worry with nuclear fission is the capacity for a meltdown, as at Chernobyl or Fukushima. However, that type of uncontrolled chain reaction simply doesn't happen with nuclear fusion. "It is absolutely impossible for a Fukushima-type accident to happen at ITER," an official documentation insisted. "The reaction relies on a continuous input of fuel; if there is any perturbation in this process, the reaction ceases immediately."

The disadvantage of nuclear fusion is obvious: it's horrendously difficult to achieve while nuclear fission power plants have been online since the 1950s.

Advantages of fusion

The next decades are crucially important to putting the world on a path of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. By the end of the century, demand for energy will have tripled under the combined pressure of population growth, increased urbanization and expanding access to electricity in developing...

www.iter.org

***snip***

No risk of meltdown: A Fukushima-type nuclear accident is not possible in a tokamak fusion device. It is difficult enough to reach and maintain the precise conditions necessary for fusion—if any disturbance occurs, the plasma cools within seconds and the reaction stops. The quantity of fuel present in the vessel at any one time is enough for a few seconds only and there is no risk of a chain reaction.

Awesome....good to know......

 

[Stann]

The depends on who you ask and if you trust their answer.

Recreating the Sun: What is nuclear fusion, is it dangerous and when will it be available?

The U.S. is expected to announce a 'major scientific breakthrough,' after reports a federal laboratory achieved a major milestone in nuclear fusion research.

newseu.cgtn.com

One huge worry with nuclear fission is the capacity for a meltdown, as at Chernobyl or Fukushima. However, that type of uncontrolled chain reaction simply doesn't happen with nuclear fusion. "It is absolutely impossible for a Fukushima-type accident to happen at ITER," an official documentation insisted. "The reaction relies on a continuous input of fuel; if there is any perturbation in this process, the reaction ceases immediately."

The disadvantage of nuclear fusion is obvious: it's horrendously difficult to achieve while nuclear fission power plants have been online since the 1950s.

Advantages of fusion

The next decades are crucially important to putting the world on a path of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. By the end of the century, demand for energy will have tripled under the combined pressure of population growth, increased urbanization and expanding access to electricity in developing...

www.iter.org

***snip***

No risk of meltdown: A Fukushima-type nuclear accident is not possible in a tokamak fusion device. It is difficult enough to reach and maintain the precise conditions necessary for fusion—if any disturbance occurs, the plasma cools within seconds and the reaction stops. The quantity of fuel present in the vessel at any one time is enough for a few seconds only and there is no risk of a chain reaction.

I guess we'll find out soon enough in the near future.

 

[ReinyDays]

The temperature increase that you mentioned is most likely at a linear relationship with the progression of the Sun's life cycle towards the red giant stage. I can't help but notice how much effort goes into insisting over and over again that the Sun's energy output has not increased noticeably over the past thousand years. On the face of it that has to be pure malarkey. At a rate of some 600 million tons per second of hydrogen consumption The sun's progression is not quite as slow as some would like to make it. It will eventually reach energy output levels that will scorch all life off the face of this planet. This is not going to happen overnight... it will happen gradually over the course of the next tens of millions of years. The planet isn't going to wake up one morning and suddenly find the temperature 300° warmer than it was the day before. In short temperature increase is an unavoidable component of our scientifically and indisputably well-established future. There is no question that the sun will eventually destroy the Earth with heat
No matter what the CO2 PPM of our atmosphere is.

Jo

Climate change using one billion year time intervals ... I want your baby inside me right now ... that eliminates the entirety of life on land ... well done my friend ...

Yes, the Sun's output is increasing and I think we have expensive custom built instruments that can measure this value ... this is tiny compared to the changes due to sunspots and the 11 year solar cycle ...

You might want to check your information ... your logic is sound but you don't show your math ... my understanding is the Sun has only increased in temperature 30% since she ignited ... 1,500ºC in 4.5 billion years gives 1ºC every 3 million years ... then divide by the Earth's share ... [shrugs shoulders] ... our Walmart thermometers aren't going to read that ...

Does the Earth's dynamo last that long? ... without a magnetic field, we're fucked ... like Mars is, with a trace of atmosphere and NO water a'tall ...

 

[luiza]

There is no possible control of Climate Change until you can control everything about the sun .

However , there is weather manipulation which is already practised extensively but with little to no official admissions .

And there is planet energy output control, and one day Fusion may be a working example of such a superb control .
But the wait for Fusion reactors is 10 years conservatively and probably much longer . Then a world wide chain of such reactors needs building .

In the interim, we are likely to have a mini ice age based on sun spot activity and past sun cycles.
That should fuck up most people's planning and plotting .

 

[peacefan]

However we don't actually know if climate change is happening because it's happening, as in previous hot periods it's got HOTTER than it is now, or if it's because of us.

yeah, you know what, climate change is caused by natural circumstances. nowadays we got the self-proclaimed "intelligent" species called humanity walking the Earth.

that makes the real question : who is going to *pay* for the reparations of the deaths caused by climate change? and when?

 

[peacefan]

What is nuclear fusion, and could it power our future?

Scientists at a U.S. government lab have announced a breakthrough in efforts to create technology that could one day offer humanity a clean, unlimited source of energy.

Remote : Tue, 13 Dec 2022 1100 -0500
Local : 2022-12-13(Tuesday) 17 : 11 : 00
Found via World Headlines on nicer.app

 

[peacefan]

and besides, weren't we looking for the perfect augmentation to clean power wind and solar power?!

 

[frigidweirdo]

yeah, you know what, climate change is caused by natural circumstances. nowadays we got the self-proclaimed "intelligent" species called humanity walking the Earth.

that makes the real question : who is going to *pay* for the reparations of the deaths caused by climate change? and when?

Well, seeing how it's GOD doing this, we should be charging the churches. Tax them.....

 

[peacefan]

Well, seeing how it's GOD doing this, we should be charging the churches. Tax them.....

*ALL OF HUMANITY SHOULD BE _TAXED_, IN THEIR MONETARY AND DEBT SYSTEMS OF THEIR SOCIETIES (AKA COUNTRIES)*.

 

[Stann]

However we don't actually know if climate change is happening because it's happening, as in previous hot periods it's got HOTTER than it is now, or if it's because of us.

Right ! ( sarcasm ). 99.9% of all the scientists in the world do know what's going on, and they've labeled it man-made climate change. It is a fact. It's already affecting us.

 

[Stann]

Well, seeing how it's GOD doing this, we should be charging the churches. Tax them.....

GOD created man. Man created man-made climate change. GOD it's supposed to be all-knowing, therefore that entity knew this would happen. Perhaps this is only a test to see how well we manage the crisis that we've created. What happens if we get a failing grade ? Is that what they call the Apocalypse ? I guess we'll just have to wait and see just how smart humanity is.