Environment & Energy
Related: About this forum'This technology is possible today': Nuclear waste could be future power source and increase access to a rare fuel
By Perri Thaler
published August 21, 2025
One physicist says his design to use nuclear waste as fuel for nuclear fusion could help the U.S. be a leader in the fusion economy.
Nuclear waste could be repurposed into a rare isotope necessary for nuclear fusion, which could theoretically produce near-limitless amounts of clean energy, one scientist says.
The radioactive version of hydrogen, called tritium, is not naturally readily available on Earth, is expensive to produce, and can be made in limited quantities. At the fall meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS) this week, Terence Tarnowsky, a physicist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, suggested that tritium could be harvested from a byproduct of nuclear fission, which powers existing nuclear reactors.
Nuclear fusion is the process of combining atoms to release heat. While several fusion reactions could theoretically produce power, one of the more common ones would fuse tritium with deuterium, another isotope of hydrogen, to produce helium.
But, as of now, nuclear fusion is not possible on a commercial scale because scientists have not yet figured out how to achieve large-scale ignition the point where a self-sustaining reaction produces more energy than is put in.
Another big barrier, though, is the cost of fuels like tritium.
More:
https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/nuclear-energy/this-technology-is-possible-today-nuclear-waste-could-be-future-power-source-and-increase-access-to-a-rare-fuel

Mark.b2
(622 posts)in fossil fuels. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl were some of the greatest modern-day hinderances ever to a particulr field of technology. Hopefully, anti-nuclear activists are in their final days of road-blocking.
NNadir
(36,410 posts)...of antinukes here. I often refer to them as "arsonists complaining about forest fires," given their specious line of whining that "nuclear takes too long to build," and other bullshit.
We have some who like to gloat that nuclear energy is not going to save the world, a feature of their selective attention. While the statement is technically true - the damage done by the antinuclear cults is now irreversible - nuclear remains the best tool available to address what can be addressed. It's not like these asshats have something better to offer.
Nuclear energy must not prove that it can save the world to be the best tool for limiting the rate of destruction of the planetary atmosphere. It only needs to be the best tool, which it is.
The tritium in used nuclear fuel - resulting from ternary fission - is one of the least valuable components in it. No one has built a working fusion reactor capable of exergy extraction. The actinides and lanthanides, as well as many of the main group fission products are thus all more valuable. The main use for tritium now is as a tracer and a sourse of 3He. Used nuclear fuel is not actually "waste" as our "but her emails" media insists. It is a highly valuable resource for future and wiser generations.
NNadir
(36,410 posts)...20 years from success.