In the UK case, it is also subject to the meaning of atomic energy:
"“atomic energy” means the energy released from atomic nuclei as the result of any process, including the fission process, but does not include energy released in any process of natural transmutation or radioactive decay which is not accelerated or influenced by external means"
I would argue that fusion doesn't release any energy. Fusion is merely the joining of nucleii into a single one with a highly exited sate. Thereafter it is a "natural transmutation...which is not accelerated or influenced by external means". So UK fusion energy isn't atomic energy anyway.
"Extra-Legal" Subjects Will NOT Be Tolerated.
-
Chris Bradley
- Posts: 2930
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
- Real name:
-
Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15023
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: "Extra-Legal" Subjects Will NOT Be Tolerated.
Chris is absolutely correct!! The act of nuclear fusion releases 0.0 (zero) amount of energy. This is why billions of your dollars, pounds, euros, etc are being spent on it and puff pieces appear regularly about its wonderful future among us. A benefactor of man for sure at zero net energy output.
I think Chris is back on the pipe again with the fusion and then secondary break up of some secondary excitation or radioactive. I don't think the powers that be would allow for the 50 femptosecond interval of the secondary. They would then say you are creating artifical radiating nuclear products due to a nuclear process that foments a direct and immediate result of a previous 50 femptosecond act, obstensibly and deliberately directed at obtaining nuclear energy output from said process.
They would find "work around wording" , as needed, to make the ole butt hole pucker as they cart you and your stuff off. Rest assured, they will rain all over any parade you care to march down the street should they be so inclined or disposed. Like you, they are masters at semantics within the legalese, with theirs prevailing, of course.
Anyone wishing to dispute my wild hypothesis here is welcome to stick their foot out into the legal traffic flow in such matters and report back what happen to them, once they are out of the meat grinder.
Richard Hull
I think Chris is back on the pipe again with the fusion and then secondary break up of some secondary excitation or radioactive. I don't think the powers that be would allow for the 50 femptosecond interval of the secondary. They would then say you are creating artifical radiating nuclear products due to a nuclear process that foments a direct and immediate result of a previous 50 femptosecond act, obstensibly and deliberately directed at obtaining nuclear energy output from said process.
They would find "work around wording" , as needed, to make the ole butt hole pucker as they cart you and your stuff off. Rest assured, they will rain all over any parade you care to march down the street should they be so inclined or disposed. Like you, they are masters at semantics within the legalese, with theirs prevailing, of course.
Anyone wishing to dispute my wild hypothesis here is welcome to stick their foot out into the legal traffic flow in such matters and report back what happen to them, once they are out of the meat grinder.
Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment