Kedikat
Posts: 680
Joined: 4/20/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: StrongButKind Functionally, Hydrogen is not a fuel source, it is an energy storage and delivery mechanism. The majority is tied up in compounds; more energy is created isolating than is produced by then burning it. But if that energy is cleaner (e.g. nuclear) than fossil fuels, it can have a benefit. In particular, many critics of fusion point out the cost, size, and dangerousness of a plant may be prohibitive could use hydrogen. A fusion plant on an island could split water, and the resulting hydrogen could be shipped as fuel. But this is a long, long way off. If it happens at all. Liquid natural gas faces similar problems for shipping. Though hydrogen is even harder. I think you mean fission not fusion. Fusion would be great. A lot yet to be discovered. As far as regular nuclear plants go, uranium is a scarcer fuel than oil. It is more powerful, but more expensive all along the line. The waste is deadly, but at least tightly contained and controlable, not just spewed out all over the place. Uranium is going up in price, and the facilities are limited. If done right, nuclear is fairly safe. Too often corners are cut. Some US plants were built with mobbed up contractors. Scams in cost and materials quality happened. Poorer countries build cheaper less safe models. And waste storage is a real nightmare. But not impossible.
|