this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2024
20 points (88.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

2312 readers
16 users here now

There is no such thing as a Stupid Question!

Don't be embarrassed of your curiosity; everyone has questions that they may feel uncomfortable asking certain people, so this place gives you a nice area not to be judged about asking it. Everyone here is willing to help.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca still apply!

Thanks for reading all of this, even if you didn't read all of this, and your eye started somewhere else, have a watermelon slice 🍉.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Kokomheart@lemmy.ca
otter@lemmy.ca
20
If nuclear fusion were to become useful for residential heating, could the plasma be useful for fake fireplaces? (lemmy.world)
submitted 8 months ago by JoshuaSlowpoke777@lemmy.world to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.ca
18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

When I say “fake fireplace”, I mean something like those structures fueled by fossil methane that produce flame and heat but obviously don’t burn actual wood

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 20 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Plasma is a bit hotter than your gas fireplace flame. Common lighter flame is at about 600 deg C and while it's possible to create plasma which is nearly ambient temperature in controlled environments it's generally tens of thousands of degrees (plasma arc welding for example) up to tens or hunderds of million degrees celsius (inside fusion generator).

That's mostly why fusion energy is so difficult problem to solve in the first place as there's no materials which could withstand the heat. So, no, it wouldn't be useful as a fireplace. It would of course radiate heat, but it would also light your (and your neighbours) house on fire, so not that useful.

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not to mention that the plasma arc would be so bright that it would blind you.

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Even worse, wavelengths of light change based on temperature so multi million degree plasma will blast you with ultraviolet and X-ray radiation

[–] IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 4 points 8 months ago

And that's why you can get a sunburn if you're welding without proper clothing/protection.

Technically speaking nothing is stopping you from building a plasma fireplace right now, it doesn't need fusion energy. Just grab a stick welder transformer and place couple of carbon rods carefully next to each other. That might be a bit loud, a bit bright for your living room and might set things on fire and have other minor issues like killing your wifi-signal, but it could be done.

Or if you're satisfied with a bit smaller "flame" you can get a plasma lighter from amazon for 10-20€.

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

on the plus side, your teeth will never be whiter! or your bones!

[–] DarkNightoftheSoul@mander.xyz 4 points 8 months ago

yeah, yeah, sure- but whatabout cold fusion?!1

[–] tobogganablaze@lemmus.org 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Nuclear fusion will happen inside a power plant far away and homes will get the electricity like from any other power plants. So no.

[–] Quereller@lemmy.one 3 points 8 months ago

The fusion is activating the walls of the reactor, they get somewhat radioactive.

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Even if your home is powered by nuclear energy, you still don’t have uranium fuel rods in your fireplace.

[–] JoshuaSlowpoke777@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

True, but I was specifically talking about nuclear fusion, which would entail helium/hydrogen plasma rather than fissionable material.

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Do you expect to keep million degree hot plasma in your fireplace?

[–] Thavron@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It'd heat up the room, though. And the next couple of rooms. Or houses.

[–] JoshuaSlowpoke777@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

No, that still probably wouldn’t work out, as the other comments have pointed out. Just clarifying that the dangerous aspects of what I asked wouldn’t involve uranium in particular.

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 months ago

Right, it uses something that’ll kill you much faster.

[–] ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The thermometer says 36 centigrade, which isn't great but it's not terrible.

[–] skarn@lemmy.today 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Plasma for fusion is at insane temperature and pressure to make fusion possible, to overcome the repulsive force that keeps protons apart by sheer velocity of the colliding nuclei. So you wouldn't have that kind of plasma in a fireplace generally. But you can get room temperature plasma today without fusion, look up plasma balls... That could make a cool (but not fire-like) fireplace, if it could be engineered into another form factor

[–] JoshuaSlowpoke777@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, maybe it would make more sense to just hook up an electrical mimic-fireplace to a fusion reactor’s electrical output, than to use the actual helium plasma exhaust to mimic flames, come to think of it.

[–] skarn@lemmy.today 1 points 6 months ago

I've seen some fake fireplaces that use steam and lights to look like fire, you could use steam from waste heat from the fusion reactor?