Energy from nuclear fusion is still not commercially viable because of:?

Question

the high energy needed to initiate the reaction.

the high energy needed to sustain the reaction.

the high cost factor involved.

All of the above.

None of the above.

Answer 1

All of the above, and the fact that there are some huge engineering hurtles that need to be overcome (e.g., materials become brittle when subjected to the energetic neutron fluxes produced by fusion). The classic joke is that cheap fusion power is 25 years away and has been for the last 50 years.

The wiki entry on this is really pretty good.

Answer 2

Your question has been very well answered by a recent article from the Oil Drum, with a very clear roadmap of the challenges ahead, and how current and future reactors aim to address them.

The issue of energy yield is expected to be addressed by the next reactor. And not much meaningful can be said about costs at this stage.

Several critical technical issues remain, and commercial fusion power is indeed '5 decades ahead'. But in defense of fusion, the political process of spending almost a decade deciding the location of the next test reactor (finally decided for Cadarache) does not help to accelerate.

Answer 3

The first answer - an incredible temperature is needed to start fusion going.

Answer 4

the respond is c because of the fact to start up fusion, u want this sort of massive element of rigidity that u somewhat could desire to do fission for that when which preserve the rigidity too... this all money owed for a extreme value element...