Bob Cook wrote: Robin— Neutron activation of reactor internal thermal shields intended to substantially protect reactor vessels from embrittlement results in a long term gamma source...------------ Yes - the key issue with fusion being less "dirty" than fission is that even if the fuel itself is completely converted to helium or other non-radioactive species, the reactor itself quickly becomes hundred of tons of "waste" in a few years. BTW - here is Steve Krivit's Valentines Card to ITER the model of hot fusion scams.
http://news.newenergytimes.net/2019/02/14/iter-promoters-pull-wool-over-eyes-of-aaas/ We should be clear that it is disingenuous to suggest that lack of fission by-products is the same as lack of nuclear waste. The is little difference in practice between fission and hot fusion when you consider the neutron activation of structures. Of course, if fusion were cheap enough - OK then maybe one can deal with the waste problem -- but as it stands now, hot fusion will be vastly more expensive than alternatives- even more expensive than solar. The mega projects like First Light make no economic or practical sense, despite the high powered (and high priced) consultants they have hired.There is no workable economic scenario on the horizon, so why spend more time and money chasing a loser technology like ITER or First Light ? Having said that, it should be mentioned that there is a caveat that changes everything except the activation of the reactor - and that is a hybrid using LENR techniques to produce muons. This possibility is not that far away according to Holmlid - in the recent edition of Fusion. If the public can live with deep ocean burial of old fusion reactors, then perhaps it makes economic sense to proceed along those lines, since a cheap fusion hybrid with LENR input makes some sense - given that muon catalyzed fusion was proved decades ago and can now provide a 10,000-to-one cost advantage over other types of input heating (according to Holmlid in the article). But the bottom line remains this - in 2019 and probably for the next decade, solar and wind with battery back-up are cost-effective options, the price of which is going down at the same time hot fusion costs are skyrocketing. Jones
