POLLUTION
The pollution that is produced through our current energy generation techniques is terrifying. With dangerous pollutants such as mercury, arsenic, lead, and selenium all coming from different forms of coal, how do we prevent these pollutants? As well, one must remember the problem with carbon emissions. Coal is anywhere from 35 to 86% carbon (Fox, 2014). This produces dangerous greenhouse gases that lead to rising ocean currents, ocean acidification, and rising yearly average temperatures. All of these effects are detrimental to the delicate ecosystems and humanity. Natural gas is just as bad as coal when it comes to the production of greenhouse gasses. Natural gas produces less carbon di-oxide, which is better for the environment, …show more content…
Nuclear fusion has no chance of producing radiation, greenhouse gases, or any other harmful substances simply because there is not any possibility of creating any of these harmful substances. The reaction to produce energy creates three products: Helium, a fast neutron and energy. It is physically impossible to create any thing else.
Fuel
The fuel for nuclear fusion is very important for the argument to use it as a renewable energy source. Deuterium and Tritium, the fuel of the reaction, are both hydrogen isotopes. Deuterium can be commonly found in seawater, as a replacement to one of the hydrogens in the water molecule; it can be obtained through distillation of ocean water. Tritium, on the other hand, is a radioactive isotope, which means over time half of its mass is lost every half-life. A half life is simply the time it takes for exactly half of the element to decay into another form. One must have a way of generating tritium then. There are proposed reactions using Lithium-6 or Lithium-7 as a reaction on the outside of the reactor to produce Tritium. Only small amounts of fuel are required to complete the reaction, and the fuel is cheaper than other energy fuels. Since this fuel can be derived, there is no chance of damaging ecosystems such as that of coal, natural gas, or crude oil. With fusion, disasters such as the BP gulf oil spill, or the Exxon Valdez would have never
The pollution that is produced through our current energy generation techniques is terrifying. With dangerous pollutants such as mercury, arsenic, lead, and selenium all coming from different forms of coal, how do we prevent these pollutants? As well, one must remember the problem with carbon emissions. Coal is anywhere from 35 to 86% carbon (Fox, 2014). This produces dangerous greenhouse gases that lead to rising ocean currents, ocean acidification, and rising yearly average temperatures. All of these effects are detrimental to the delicate ecosystems and humanity. Natural gas is just as bad as coal when it comes to the production of greenhouse gasses. Natural gas produces less carbon di-oxide, which is better for the environment, …show more content…
Nuclear fusion has no chance of producing radiation, greenhouse gases, or any other harmful substances simply because there is not any possibility of creating any of these harmful substances. The reaction to produce energy creates three products: Helium, a fast neutron and energy. It is physically impossible to create any thing else.
Fuel
The fuel for nuclear fusion is very important for the argument to use it as a renewable energy source. Deuterium and Tritium, the fuel of the reaction, are both hydrogen isotopes. Deuterium can be commonly found in seawater, as a replacement to one of the hydrogens in the water molecule; it can be obtained through distillation of ocean water. Tritium, on the other hand, is a radioactive isotope, which means over time half of its mass is lost every half-life. A half life is simply the time it takes for exactly half of the element to decay into another form. One must have a way of generating tritium then. There are proposed reactions using Lithium-6 or Lithium-7 as a reaction on the outside of the reactor to produce Tritium. Only small amounts of fuel are required to complete the reaction, and the fuel is cheaper than other energy fuels. Since this fuel can be derived, there is no chance of damaging ecosystems such as that of coal, natural gas, or crude oil. With fusion, disasters such as the BP gulf oil spill, or the Exxon Valdez would have never