The future of helium?

[Kim]

I saw an interesting Discovery channel program last night - Nuclear Tech.

It seems that when they finally get fusion reactors worked out there is only one by-product.....helium. Any nuclear physicists out there know any more about this?

 

[vondo]

I saw an interesting Discovery channel program last night - Nuclear Tech.

It seems that when they finally get fusion reactors worked out there is only one by-product.....helium. Any nuclear physicists out there know any more about this?

I'm a sub-nuclear physicist, does that count?

First, we've been hearing that these types of reactors are 30-40 years away for, oh, 40 years. So, don't hold your breath. In any case, the amount of helium produced would be very small. And, while the hydrogen that is fused into deuterium might be all used up and produce no by-products, the machinery of the reactor would probably be quite radioactive and gasses released there would contaminate any helium.

All the helium we use comes as a by-product of natural gas extraction. It is trapped in underground caverns and is formed by radioactive decay of things like uranium.

 

[Green_Manelishi]

I'm a sub-nuclear physicist, does that count?

First, we've been hearing that these types of reactors are 30-40 years away for, oh, 40 years. So, don't hold your breath. In any case, the amount of helium produced would be very small. And, while the hydrogen that is fused into deuterium might be all used up and produce no by-products, the machinery of the reactor would probably be quite radioactive and gasses released there would contaminate any helium.

All the helium we use comes as a by-product of natural gas extraction. It is trapped in underground caverns and is formed by radioactive decay of things like uranium.

But if you breathe that radioactive He, won't it help keep you warm? :11:

 

[Kim]

First, we've been hearing that these types of reactors are 30-40 years away for, oh, 40 years. So, don't hold your breath.

Yes, I know it's still not there yet but they've made SOME progress right? They are about to build quite a big test reactor in France I thought. If your right about the radioactivity then I suppose that would spoil things a bit. On the other hand - how can they say that it's 'clean' and produces no waste at all if it's actually producing radioactive gas? I must admit I know very little about this - I sat up in my chair when I heard it last night though!

 

[CuriousRambler]

There are several test reactors being built, but as far as I know none are operational yet. There's a bit of distance to cover before fusion is half as common as fission reactors, but I imagine it'll take over pretty quickly once the technology gets there. Who wants to have waste around that's deadly for a couple hundred million years when you don't have to?

Unfortunately I doubt we're going to see an abundance of those reactors in our lifetimes.

 

[vondo]

Yes, I know it's still not there yet but they've made SOME progress right? They are about to build quite a big test reactor in France I thought. If your right about the radioactivity then I suppose that would spoil things a bit. On the other hand - how can they say that it's 'clean' and produces no waste at all if it's actually producing radioactive gas? I must admit I know very little about this - I sat up in my chair when I heard it last night though!

They have made some progress. ITER is the name of the reactor in France. If memory serves, ITER may get more energy out than they put in. To be useful, you have to get a lot more energy out than you put in. Then you have to move from a research project to a production reactor.

The amount of radioactive products are small and they will build the reactor vessel out of materials that either resist becoming radioactive or who's radioactivity dies off quickly. Nothing is "waste free". BTW, did you know that a coal power plant releases more radioactivity than a fission plant? There are a lot of radioactive minerals in the coal.

 

[Kim]

Oh well....no cheap abundant helium for diving in the future then? What a pity!

 

[CuriousRambler]

BTW, did you know that a coal power plant releases more radioactivity than a fission plant? There are a lot of radioactive minerals in the coal.

Is that true? Can you give me any statistical support, like a website or something? Not that I don't trust your word, I just think that's crazy, wouldn't mind seeing some proof of it.

Edit: And I'm most definitely not trying to be rude with this, I'm seriously curious/amazed!

 

[vondo]

You can google "radioactive release coal nuclear" or take a look at this (2nd link): http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen99/gen99402.HTM

What you have to realize is that a nuclear plant releases VERY little radiation. The waste left over is very radioactive, but it doesn't end up in the environment (assuming things go well).

Edit: So what I mean by that is not that the radiation from coal is dangerous, just that the normal releases from a nuclear plant are nothing to worry about either.

 

[Charlie99]

Is that true? Can you give me any statistical support, like a website or something? Not that I don't trust your word, I just think that's crazy, wouldn't mind seeing some proof of it.

Edit: And I'm most definitely not trying to be rude with this, I'm seriously curious/amazed!

I'll see if I can dig up some specifics, but the concept is pretty simple ---- when you burn tons and tons of coal, the various trace radioactive elements in the coal go out the smokestack as gases. The amounts of natural radioactive material in coal is a relatively small percentage, but when you are burning many tons, it adds up.