Is cold fusion safer?

[TransformerRobot]

Is cold fusion safer than regular nuclear power? As in it's less likely to result in catastrophes on a Chernobyl-scale?

[swansont]

Seeing as how cold fusion has not been shown to work in any repeatable, scientific way, much less generate usable energy in a commercial setting, I think safety is a moot point.

[Phi for All]

Is cold fusion safer than regular nuclear power? As in it's less likely to result in catastrophes on a Chernobyl-scale?

In that regard, cold fusion is MUCH safer than nuclear power. Current cold fusion technology will never result in even a single catastrophe on a Chernobyl scale.

[TransformerRobot]

Then is it a viable power source for certain machines?

[ACG52]

Then is it a viable power source for certain machines?

No. It doesn't exist.

[Phi for All]

Then is it a viable power source for certain machines?

 

Absolutely not.

[swansont]

In that regard, cold fusion is MUCH safer than nuclear power. Current cold fusion technology will never result in even a single catastrophe on a Chernobyl scale.

 

I disagree. Chernobyl was a ~1000 MW reactor. Since cold fusion doesn't work, the mass of cold fusion devices necessary on earth to produce 1000 MW of power would be enough to collapse the earth into a black hole, killing everyone. That's more than died from Chernobyl.

[John Cuthber]

This certainly isn't chemistry and I think it should be in speculations.

[Phi for All]

 

I disagree. Chernobyl was a ~1000 MW reactor. Since cold fusion doesn't work, the mass of cold fusion devices necessary on earth to produce 1000 MW of power would be enough to collapse the earth into a black hole, killing everyone. That's more than died from Chernobyl.

 

Good point. I forgot about the ACME Effect, Wiley.