🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <FRANL.92Apr3132432@draco.centerline.com>, franl@centerline.com (Fran Litterio) writes:
|> In article <69672@ut-emx.uucp> johncobb@ut-emx.cc.utexas.edu (John W. Cobb) writes:
|> 
|> > Moreover, you don't have
|> > nasty by products like radioactive cesium and iodine that would come from
|> > a leak. You may have some tritium and some induced radioactivity from
|> > structural components, but again, the total inventory is much smaller.
|> 
|> Isn't liquid lithium forseen as the medium used to absorbe the
|> neutrons speeding away from the fusion reaction?  The
|> (themodynamically) hot lithium would heat pressurized water that would
|> eventually drive steam turbines to make electricity.  Over time the
|> lithium becomes radioactive and needs to be replaced.  Being a liquid
|> would actually make it harder to manage the storage of waste over many
|> decades (in general, liquids leak, evaporate, corrode containers, etc.
|> more easilly than do solids).
|> --

If I am not mistaken, it depends on the type opf fusion reaction you hope to
pursue, D-D, D-T etc.
-- 

Regards.
 
Don Rolph  a722756@pan.mc.ti.com WD3 MS10-13 (508)-699-1263