Comparing Fusion Energy Options: Hot, Cold & Sonofusion

  • Thread starter Thread starter scorpio_wan1945
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Fusion
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
Sign up Log in
2 replies · 3K views
scorpio_wan1945
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
By comparing hot, cold and soundfusion (sonofusion) power which one yields more energy and more favourable for future power generation?

well as far as i know sonoluminscence are generated from collapse of bubble when excited by ultrasonic sound wave, thus light are emmited from it, and it is estimated the tempreture of it could rise up to few megakelvin.

and in terms of economics, would it be easier to operate a fission power plant(the nuclear plant we have today) compared to cold fusion or possibily sonofusion plant in the future?


thanks in advanceo:)
 

Discussion

Physics news on Phys.org
I still have my doubts about cold fusion, so I am skeptical (even cynical) with regard to a power source.

As for sonofusion, I believe it is practical for small neutron sources, but not for power production.

Due to the low temperatures (which means there is a 'very small' amount of energy produced in a relatively large mass), the only practical energy conversion method would be direct conversion. However, that does not seem practical for sonofusion.
 
scorpio_wan1945 said:
By comparing hot, cold and soundfusion (sonofusion) power which one yields more energy and more favourable for future power generation?
What nuclear reactions are used in each? Please write the equations, along with the energy released in each. That will start to answer your questions... (well, except for the practicality and viability of each...)