{"id":10804,"date":"2012-06-17T09:45:00","date_gmt":"2012-06-17T09:45:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/198.74.50.173\/2012\/06\/what-is-energy-content-of-earths-water.html"},"modified":"2017-04-07T04:28:32","modified_gmt":"2017-04-07T04:28:32","slug":"what-is-energy-content-of-earths-water","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/2012\/06\/what-is-energy-content-of-earths-water.html","title":{"rendered":"What is the energy content of Earth\u2019s Water for D-D (Deuterium-Deuterium) fusion?"},"content":{"rendered":"<div dir=\"ltr\" style=\"text-align: left;\" trbidi=\"on\">\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">What is the energy content of Earth\u2019s Water for D-D (Deuterium-Deuterium) fusion? <\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">A guest article by Joseph Friedlander for Brian Wang\u2019s Next Big Future<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">What is the energy content of Earth\u2019s water for D-D (Deuterium-Deuterium) fusion?<\/div>\n<ul style=\"margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;\" type=\"disc\">\n<li class=\"MsoNormal\">Each      cubic meter of seawater contains about 1.028 x 10e25 atoms of deuterium      with a mass of around 34.4 grams is equivalent to the heat combustion of 269 metric tons of coal, or      of 1,360 barrels of crude oil.<\/li>\n<li class=\"MsoNormal\">The world resource of      seawater\u2019s deuterium is around a billion times the fossil fuel reserve.<\/li>\n<li class=\"MsoNormal\">Each cubic meter of seawater      has a deuterium energy content equivalent to a 1.8=2.8 kiloton bomb.<b><\/b><\/li>\n<li class=\"MsoNormal\">269 metric tons of coal per      cubic meter of seawater\u2019s deuterium (34.4 grams by Hubbert) gives a weight      equivalency of 7819767 times the deuterium\u2019s weight in coal. Or 269 times      the water\u2019s weight in coal.<\/li>\n<li class=\"MsoNormal\">If we could use dilute deuterium (we can&#8217;t) in D-D fusion reactors (there aren&#8217;t any)&nbsp;&nbsp;at $80 coal equivalent &nbsp;fuel value for a cubic meter of&nbsp;&nbsp;seawater (269 metric tons coal equivalent) would be&nbsp;&nbsp;$21520. &nbsp;But no one would pay coal rates for cheap fusion\u2014prices would go down and demand explode. (I hope not literally:&gt;)) &nbsp;<\/li>\n<li class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<div style=\"color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;\">Plainly energy would be much, much cheaper, I have calculated about 1900 times cheaper here&#8211;&nbsp;<\/div>\n<div style=\"color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/2012\/01\/what-if-we-get-super-cheap-d-d.html\">https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/2012\/01\/what-if-we-get-super-cheap-d-d.html<\/a><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<div style=\"color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;\">&nbsp;and done calculations on cheapness of&nbsp;&nbsp;TNT equivalence here&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/2012\/02\/which-is-cheaper-per-unit-of-energy.html\">https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/2012\/02\/which-is-cheaper-per-unit-of-energy.html<\/a>&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\" style=\"color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;\">(Quick summary: at $10 million a 1 megaton device, the energy generated is as expensive as coal.&nbsp;<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\" style=\"color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;\">IF the device gets cheaper or larger the price goes down accordingly)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\" style=\"color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;\">&nbsp;If you like calculating for non-explosive fusion reactors, a gigawatt year thermal is about equivalent to 7.5 megatons TNT.&nbsp;&nbsp;So that\u2019s equivalent to $75 million for a one year lifespan gigawatt thermal reactor\u2014as expensive as coal. &nbsp;Make it bigger or cheaper and the price goes down. Smaller or more expensive and it can\u2019t compete\u2026And if the lifespan of the reactor increases, the price goes down, but only to a limit because of the time value of money (discounting).<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<p>\n<a name='more'><\/a><\/p>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><br class=\"Apple-interchange-newline\" \/>&nbsp;<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">=============Sources and derivations=================<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">In a book carried on Google Books<\/div>\n<h1 style=\"background-color: white; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;\">&nbsp;<\/h1>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoBodyText3\"><b>&nbsp;Nuclear. Power and The Public. A. Symposium, Minneapolis, Oct. 1969&nbsp;&nbsp; Harry Foreman et al<\/b><b><\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><a href=\"http:\/\/books.google.co.il\/books?id=Ld4U6uZNa44C&amp;pg=PA205&amp;lpg=PA205&amp;dq=cubic+kilometer+water+tons+deuterium&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=DrGu4CzzgW&amp;sig=klLv8n6BoZjwsGi8unbyFtCE1hk&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=oJrZT4LoL8mN4gS9v-SrAw&amp;redir_esc=y#v=onepage&amp;q=cubic%20kilome\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">http:\/\/books.google.co.il\/books?id=Ld4U6uZNa44C&amp;pg=PA205&amp;lpg=PA205&amp;dq=cubic+kilometer+water+tons+deuterium&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=DrGu4CzzgW&amp;sig=klLv8n6BoZjwsGi8unbyFtCE1hk&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=oJrZT4LoL8mN4gS9v-SrAw&amp;redir_esc=y#v=onepage&amp;q=cubic%20kilometer%20water%20tons%20deuterium&amp;f=false<\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">And in echo in the<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Congressional report&nbsp; \u201cGROWTH AND ITS IMPLICATIONS<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">FOR THE FUTURE\u201d<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">by the United States Congress Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildlife, Conservation and the Environment of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries,&nbsp; Ninety-third Congress<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;(page 85 of 110) which is carried online here but in horrendous OCR error laden format\u2026&nbsp;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ebooksread.com\/authors-eng\/united-states-congress-house-committee-on-merch\/growth-and-its-implications-for-the-future-hearing-with-appendix-ninety-third--tin\/page-85-growth-and-its-implications-for-the-future-hearing-with-appendix-ni%20\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">http:\/\/www.ebooksread.com\/authors-eng\/united-states-congress-house-committee-on-merch\/growth-and-its-implications-for-the-future-hearing-with-appendix-ninety-third&#8211;tin\/page-85-growth-and-its-implications-for-the-future-hearing-with-appendix-ninety-third&#8211;tin.shtml<\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">In both cases the statistics appear to be based on calculations generated by&nbsp;M. King Hubbert<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;(Yes, THAT Hubbert, who predicted the US peak oil production domestically\u2014in 1956\u2014for about the time these documents were published in 1969-70)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">which basically pointed out that deuterium reserves of Earth were around a billion times then known fossil fuel reserves. (Because of the scarcity of lithium-6, lithium deuterium fusion basically was only equal to fossil fuel reserves, this explains why the billion times more abundant deuterium is such a big deal, and why I write frequently on D-D fusion. In that era,<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Hubbert (and Caltech geochemist Harrison Brown, who wrote&nbsp;<b>The Challenge of Man&#8217;s Future (Viking, New York, 1954)<\/b>&nbsp; warned that on a closed and finite Earth, the graph of oil consumption over time (considered on a scale of thousands of years must appear like a single sharp vertical spike on a near-flat graph).&nbsp; Brown considered the Earth a finite and closed system and considered nuclear power (and thermonuclear) a necessity if industrial civilization was not to collapse over millennial timescales.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">On page 205 of the Harry Foreman book,&nbsp;M. King Hubbert writes<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\u201c\u2026whereas the deuterium in the oceans 1.5 x 10e 48 atoms, or about a billion times the lithium-6 supply.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoBodyText2\">The energy obtainable from the lithium-deuterium reaction based on the total supply of lithium-6 would be about 2.4 x 10e23 joules approximately&nbsp; equal to&nbsp; that of the (1970 estimate\u2014JF) world\u2019s supply of the fossil fuels. The energy obtainable from a deuterium-deuterium fusion would be of the order of a billion times larger.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">For a more tangible future, 1 cubic meter of seawater contains about (~1.028\u2014JF) 1.03 x 10e25 atoms of deuterium having a mass of 34.4 grams,&nbsp; and a potential fusion energy of 8.16 x 10e12 joules.<b><\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>Ths is equivalent to the heat combustion of 269 metric tons of coal, or of 1,360<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>barrels of crude oil. The deuterium in 28 cubic kilometers of seawater would have an energy equivalent to the worlds coal supply.\u201d<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Friedlander here&#8211; In this book Hubbert estimates that fossil fuels will be only able to supply the major part of the world\u2019s power for 3 centuries. He dismisses water power because of silting of reservoirs, geothermal and tidal power as being vast but of small tappable magnitude. Hubbert regards nuclear power as the sole source of sufficient magnitude to supply Man for the long haul.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">It is interesting that those who quote Hubbert on the need to conserve oil never quote his nuclear conclusions\u2014and also interesting that at the exact time he was writing this Gerard K. O\u2019Neill was calculating that space solar power alone could supply man with no need for nuclear power. So this is an illustration that powerful intellects can come to utterly different conclusions based upon their starting assumptions.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Now the&nbsp;Congressional report&nbsp; \u201cGROWTH AND ITS IMPLICATIONS<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">FOR THE FUTURE\u201d<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Has this paragraph&nbsp; (apparently starting with the Hubbert stats as a starting point) \u2014\u201cSince a cubic kilometer contains 10e9 cubic meters, if follows that&nbsp;<b>the fuel equivalents of 1 cubic kilometer of sea water are 269 billion tons of coal, or 1,360 billion barrels of crude oil. The latter figure is approximately equal to the lower of the two estimates of ultimate world resources of crude oil.<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>Since the ultimate world coal resources as estimated by Averitt are about<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>7,600 X 10e9 metric tons, the volume of sea water required to be equivalent<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>to this would be about 28 cubic kilometers. The total volume of the oceans<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>is about 1.5 billion cubic kilometers. Should enough deuterium be withdrawn<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>to reduce the initial concentration by 1 percent, the energy released by<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>fusion would amount to about 500,000 times that of the world&#8217;s initial<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>supply of fossil fuels.<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">From Carey Sublette\u2019s Nuclear Weapons Faq&nbsp;http:\/\/nuclearweaponarchive.org\/Nwfaq\/Nfaq0.html<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fusion of pure deuterium: 82.2 kt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">1 kt&nbsp;&nbsp; (equivalent \u2013JF)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4.19x10e12 joules<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">(a joule is a watt second &#8211;JF)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;so 344.418&nbsp;&nbsp;x10e12 joules ( per kilogram of D-D fusion\u2014JF)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">34.4 grams, (after Hubbert) of D-D per cubic meter of sea water<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">1 in 6400 hydrogen atoms is deuterium<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Ordinary water is 88.8% oxygen to about 11.2% hydrogen by mass<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Heavy water is typically around 20% deuterium by mass (if pure)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">World Water supply around 1.37 billion cubic kilometers \u2013calculating for pure water<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">1.37 billion billion cubic meters (tons) 153,440 grams of ordinary hydrogen (at 11.2% weight ) per cubic meter water<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoBodyText\">34.4 grams deuterium so 1\/4460 by weight. This is .7 of the 1\/6400 value so there may be some disconnect between the figures.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoBodyText\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoBodyText\">Wikipedia says&#8211;<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;1 in 6400 hydrogen atoms is deuterium, which is 1 part in 3200 by weight (hydrogen weight).&nbsp;<a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Heavy_water\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Heavy_water<\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Between 3200 and 4460 is a ratio of 1.4375 or .695. I will note this and neglect it, moving on with the article. Possibly Hubbert\u2019s figures are wrong, but his point is still valid.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Assuming Hubbert\u2019s figures are right and applying Sublette\u2019s calculation of:&nbsp;82.2 kt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">82.2 tons TNT equivalent per gram Deuterium<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>So the equivalent in TNT of each cubic meter of seawater\u2019s deuterium is 2827.68 tons TNT or a 2.8 kiloton bomb!<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>According however to the classic 7:1 rule (7 kilotons of TNT equals a kiloton of coal)<\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.convertaz.com\/convert-ton-of-coal-equivalent-to-ton-of-tnt\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">http:\/\/www.convertaz.com\/convert-ton-of-coal-equivalent-to-ton-of-tnt\/<\/a><b><\/b><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>&nbsp;the equivalent yield would be 269 tons of coal x 7 or&nbsp;<\/b>about 1.8 kilotons (1883 tons TNT)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">The discrepancy may be due to errors, the fact that coal is a variable quality resource and so on. But the magnitude of energy is clear.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><br class=\"Apple-interchange-newline\" \/>&nbsp;<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\"><b>269 metric tons of coal per cubic meter of water\u2019s deuterium (34.4 grams by Hubbert) gives a weight equivalency of 7819767 times the deuterium\u2019s weight in coal. Or 269 times the seawater\u2019s weight in coal.<\/b><b><br \/>\n<\/b><\/div>\n<p><\/p>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n1 million tons of coal equivalent 29.3 million gJ\/(almost a gigawatt year) would be $80 million.<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/www4c.wolframalpha.com\/input\/?i=tons+of+coal+equivalent+in+3+gigawatt+year\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">http:\/\/www4c.wolframalpha.com\/input\/?i=tons+of+coal+equivalent+in+3+gigawatt+year<\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;======================<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Convenient Energy Content Approximations<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;<a href=\"http:\/\/nuclearweaponarchive.org\/Nwfaq\/Nfaq0.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">http:\/\/nuclearweaponarchive.org\/Nwfaq\/Nfaq0.html<\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fission of U-233:&nbsp; 17.8 kt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fission of U-235:&nbsp; 17.6 kt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fission of Pu-239: 17.3 kt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fusion of pure deuterium: 82.2 kt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fusion of tritium and deuterium (50\/50): 80.4 kt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fusion of lithium-6 deuteride: 64.0 kt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fusion of lithium-7 deuteride ?<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Total conversion of matter to energy: 21.47 Mt\/kg<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Fission of 1.11 g U-235: 1 megawatt-day (thermal)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">1 kt&nbsp;&nbsp; (equivalent \u2013JF)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 10^12 calories<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4.19&#215;10^12 joules<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4.19&#215;10^19 ergs<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2.62&#215;10^31 eV<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2.62&#215;10^25 MeV<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; fission of 0.241 moles of material (1.45&#215;10^23 nuclei)<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; fission of approx. 57 g of material<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Deuterium produces energy through four reactions:<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">D + T -&gt; He-4 + n + 17.588 MeV<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">D + D -&gt; He-3 + n + 3.268 MeV<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">D + D -&gt; T + p + 4.03 MeV<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">He-3 + D -&gt; He-4 + p + 18.34 MeV<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">If only reactions 1-3 contribute significantly, corresponding to the combustion of 25% of the deuterium fuel or less, then the energy output is 57 kT\/kg. If reaction 4 contributes to the maximum extent, the output is 82.4 kT\/kg. The maximum temperature generated by an efficient burn reaches 350 million K.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">The net effect of reactions 1-4 together is:<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">6 D -&gt; 2 He-4 + 2p + 2n + 43.243 MeV<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">Of the two neutrons produced, one is high energy (14.07 MeV) and one is moderate energy (2.450). The ratio of high energy neutrons produced to deuterons consumed (or energy produced) is significant for driving fast fission reactions. If the He-3 is converted to tritium instead of being burned directly, the net reaction is the same with the exception that two high energy neutrons are produced.<\/div>\n<div class=\"MsoNormal\">\n<\/div>\n<p><br class=\"Apple-interchange-newline\" \/><\/p>\n<p>\n<i>If you liked this article, please give it a quick review on <b><a href=\"http:\/\/news.ycombinator.com\/submit\" target=\"blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ycombinator<\/a><\/b> or <b><a href=\"http:\/\/www.stumbleupon.com\/\" target=\"blank\" rel=\"noopener\">StumbleUpon<\/a><\/b>. Thanks<\/i><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>What is the energy content of Earth\u2019s Water for D-D (Deuterium-Deuterium) fusion? A guest article by Joseph Friedlander for Brian Wang\u2019s Next Big Future What is the energy content of Earth\u2019s water for D-D (Deuterium-Deuterium) fusion? Each cubic meter of seawater contains about 1.028 x 10e25 atoms of deuterium with a mass of around 34.4 &#8230; <\/p>\n<p class=\"read-more-container\"><a title=\"What is the energy content of Earth\u2019s Water for D-D (Deuterium-Deuterium) fusion?\" class=\"read-more button\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/2012\/06\/what-is-energy-content-of-earths-water.html#more-10804\" aria-label=\"More on What is the energy content of Earth\u2019s Water for D-D (Deuterium-Deuterium) fusion?\">Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[183,172,13,55,11,94,220],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10804"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10804"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10804\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10804"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10804"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextbigfuture.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10804"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}