yes but you will still need fertile material to do so and that is still limited, it is not as if the atoms springs out of thin air.
again if you use a fusion breeder reactor where the fuel goes through several cycles then in essence you would have at least as efficient a system.
any claim as to how long we have fuel for for such a system is well above ad beyond anything remotely achievable by fission on earth alone.
but again my argument is not that it is a viable short term energy source, but that it will be able to provide and sustain a higher energy output overall, fusion simply yields vastly more energy compaed to mass expended, the loss of that energy after its produced is an engineering qestion, in some designs it is as previously stated a non issue, in others the reason they dont work, if the previosuly quoted article employed pure he-he fusion in their next stage of research then the energy would be transferred to the EM field with almost no loss or delay and since it is pulsed in the time frame of a 100 nanoseconds with limited fuel then any heat loss or loss of containment is extremely minimal.
theoretically it should scale very well, if they reach breakeven by next year we might even know within the next 5, if it works one needs to be able to repeat the process quickly enough to actually be feasible for continous production.
if i had the choice of what to do i would still use liquid thorium reactors, due to the safety and ease of construction, no high pressure vessel to blow out either.
_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//
the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.
21 Sep 2012, 12:41 am
