Kürzlich habe ich ein Video über das ITER-Projekt in Südfrankreich erstellt, eine bahnbrechende Initiative, die darauf abzielt, die Energie durch Kernfusion zu revolutionieren. Das Video befasst sich mit den ehrgeizigen Zielen von ITER, den technischen Wunderwerken, die ihn antreiben, und wie es im Vergleich zu neuen Technologien wie kleinen modularen Reaktoren (SMRs) abschneidet.
Da dieses Projekt die Zukunft der nachhaltigen Energie prägen wird, bin ich gespannt auf Ihre Gedanken. Wie beurteilen Sie die potenziellen Auswirkungen von ITER auf den globalen Energiebedarf? Gibt es Aspekte der Fusionsenergie, die Ihrer Meinung nach in Mainstream-Diskussionen übersehen werden?
Das Video finden Sie hier: https://youtu.be/3qMgUGhNVw4?si=hOK5txdzju9KXmeS.
Wir freuen uns auf Ihr Feedback und Ihre Erkenntnisse!
1 Comment
A well put together video with some good visuals and explanations. I have a few comments and opinions on the subject:
Fusion experiments so far have not been failures. There’s a really all or nothing, success or failure vibe in this video. Firstly, net positive energy has already been achieved at least twice in fusion experiments, if only for a few seconds. Secondly, even for those that didn’t, we usually learn something from them anyway. Even ITER is a *research* reactor, as mentioned in the video.
Comparing ITER and SMRs wasn’t a good idea, they have different timelines and applications. Large scale fusion would be for commercial use in many decades time, such as powering cities (or maybe a starship engine in hundreds of years time), eventually to replace fission if renewables don’t get there first. SMRs are more targeted for industrial use (producing heat, steam, hydrogen, or soon powering server farms for dumb things like generating AI media for everything…) or locations with poor national grids (including space colonies!). Also, it seems most SMR projects are based on already working nuclear submarine technology, which puts it way ahead of fusion in terms of maturity.
Fission reactors produce tritium as a byproduct, which could then help fuel fusion. I’m not an expert on how you get it from seawater (centrifuge?), but separating isotopes of hydrogen is probably very energy/resource intensive itself. There have been other projects to reuse fission byproducts in the past, including working plants in France, it’s a shame there’s less focus on those today. My major issue with fission is storing the high activity waste for 10000+ years in facilities that need constant power and maintenance, but otherwise I thought we should have built more nuclear fission fleets 10 years ago to see us through until fusion comes along.
Finally, I don’t care what anyone says about costs for any of these technologies. Many large scale projects have gone over budget and schedule but have been considered an overall benefit in the long term: UK/France channel tunnel, Sydney opera house, Panama canal expansion, Sagrada Familia Cathedral, three gorges dam, International Space Station…