Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It largely depends on the elements used for the inner reactor walls and there is ongoing research to find good candidate materials[1].

Yes, radioactive waste will be produced - unless an aneutronic fusion process can be handled - but the goal is to have low-halftime waste that is manageable and does not have to be contained for millions of years. And fission reactors also have this problem to some degree, although their neutron radiation has very different energy profiles compared to fusion. When they are dismantled their reactor cores also have to be treated as waste. But unlike fusion plants you have to deal with the structural materials AND the actual spent fuel. So fusion plants will generally be better than fission, no matter what you end up doing.

Additionally the high energy neutrons of fusion reactors may prove useful to transmutate radioactive waste from fission plants so they might actually lead to a net reduction in radioactive waste.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fusion_Materials_...



The argument about the fuel not turning into nuclear waste is compelling. So we're talking about less radioactive material with a shorter half-life. Win-win!


Depends on what you mean with "less", especially since as far as I understand no one is close to a economically viable solution yet. But shorter half-life is most likely true.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: