Reply To: turn heat into electricity

[Rezwan]

Several concepts in one, but I despair because this is over-simplifying things. And the more you think about it, the more concepts you seem to need to add. Let’s try to come up with the bullet points first, then figure out the simplest illustration. We want to crystallize these interrelated issues into one easy poster.

1) Fusion Fission: Need to mention that fusion is not fission – fission breaks things apart, has a bunch of neutrons and risks a chain reaction. That’s “The bad”. Grandpa’s Fusion (mainstream) is “the good.” And aneutronic is “the best.” (well, we can’t call it ugly).

2) Differentiating fusion – there are many ways to fuse nuclei. To simplify, 2 main approaches
a) with neutrons means you are going for heat production – good, but still a bit radioactive. the holy grail.
b) without means you can go for electricity directly – and not radioactive. The holiest grail.

3) Nuclear is not evil if it’s aneutronic. Drive home the “Truly clean nuclear energy” here. N-word attack. The peace sign is the best approach here. But this will stumble on disbelief. We need a separate poster to really reassure people it’s not useful in nuclear weaponry.

4) aneutronic means not having to use a steam engine anymore – truly futuristic (all energy ideas so far are antiquated in comparison).

5) Aneutronic needs much greater energy to pull off, so people have historically shied away from it. Except today when there are several aneutronic experiments going forward (the coolest being LPPX, of course) (Show images of a few machines?)

5a) Yes, it’s difficult. Perhaps impossible. But what does it say about our character that we don’t try to solve it? (a dig to character is important. This poster isn’t just about aneutronic fusion – some vague science concept, it’s a mirror into the soul of the person looking at the poster. Will they fuse with the problem and release a greater energy? Or will they walk away untouched?)

6) These experiments need your support. Get involved.