For and against
For nuclear fusion
- Nuclear fusion could solve the world鈥檚 energy needs because hydrogen and deuterium are widely available as the constituents of seawater and so are relatively cheap and nearly inexhaustible.
- Fusion does not emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
- There is no radioactive waste with a fusion reaction. The major by-product is helium, an inert, non-toxic gas.
- Fusing nuclei together in a controlled way releases four million times more energy per kg than a chemical reaction such as burning coal, oil or gas. This keeps transportation and mining costs low and reduces the associated hazards.
- Nuclear fusion releases four times more energy per kg than a nuclear fission reaction.
Against nuclear fusion
- The technological difficulties of fusion reactors are difficult to overcome.
- Temperatures approaching the temperature of the sun (approximately 150,000,000 掳C) are required for fusion to occur on Earth. Reaching this very high temperature and containing the reaction at it for a sufficiently long time is very difficult.
- There are many difficulties to overcome before nuclear fusion provides electricity on a commercial scale and it may be another 50 years before that happens.
- Nuclear fusion reactors will be expensive to build because of the technology required.
- The system used to contain the nuclear fusion reaction will be expensive to operate because of the very high temperatures needed for the nuclei to fuse.