Power-hungry, but not sciencyWith UUMatter we already have a power hungry method of getting other resources.

Totally unrelated, but my UU factory is also lagging my base like 15 FPS and I can't really explain why, I think its the recyclers.
Power-hungry, but not sciencyWith UUMatter we already have a power hungry method of getting other resources.
Place lithium rods next to working fuel rods and they get instantly converted. So you need a big enough lithium supply and the rest is complex but cheap automation.But how long does it take?
Does it give energy?
INSTANTLY ?!Place lithium rods next to working fuel rods and they get instantly converted. So you need a big enough lithium supply and the rest is complex but cheap automation.
Not quite true. Anything with high enough gravity that isn't too close to a start can retain helium in its atmosphere. That includes gas giants and some of the so-called "super-Earths". As opposed to getting it from stars, we might actually be able to do the gas giant atmosphere extraction, it's just not cost-efficient.In the Real World (IRL), Helium is extremely rare on earth. It's plentiful in stars via fusion of Hydrogen, but our civilization is not at the level yet where we can mine Helium in/from the sun or other stars. Perhaps we can make Helium in a fusion reactor on earth.
I thought there is lots of helium on the moon ?Not quite true. Anything with high enough gravity that isn't too close to a start can retain helium in its atmosphere. That includes gas giants and some of the so-called "super-Earths". As opposed to getting it from stars, we might actually be able to do the gas giant atmosphere extraction, it's just not cost-efficient.
That's an unproven hypothesis for now, and in any case, while it may be more abundant on the moon than on Earth, it's still far below what would be available from gas giants. In any case, it's still not quite clear if helium-3 fusion is viable since it requires significantly higher temperatures for an economically feasible power output.I thought there is lots of helium on the moon ?
tl;dr, the tritium/fission converion method is...good?Yeah that seems rather ridiculous for tritium as I've just been testing, it's set so that they convert at a rate of 1 + heat/3000 progress each time they get hit with a neutron. However as they're set to requiring zero progress for some reason anything that hits them with neutrons will instantly convert them. So for example take any reactor design and replace a neutron reflector with a lithium cell, the reactor should be cooler so produce less energy but it will convert at a rate of one lithium cell to tritium cell per second per slot. That will be trivial to run and keep in a cool reactor with thorium being superior due to the higher durability and it will easily produce more tritium then you know what to do with, the limiting factor will become lithium as mentioned but that's easy to get from dirt as previously covered in the thread. 1 lithium = 2 tritium too so while you'll need 5 slots converting lithium to tritium that only requires 5 tiny lithium dust a second. So 4 MV Electrolyzers converting clay to lithium which will consume 4 clay dust a second, as it's 18 dirt per clay dust you'll be needing to centrifuge 72 dirt a second which is where the real brunt of the work comes in as that's 864 LV centrifuge recipes at once. Of course it can be done better obviously, a mere 54 IV centrifuges could do it for instance.
So probably best to sticking to just synthesising clay if you're using UU.
Yeah, it's ludicrously fast compared to anything else. A max conversion rate of nearly 1200mB per second from a single reactor if you could somehow supply enough lithium. Add in that you'll probably be wanting an automatic clay production system anyway for the lithium/aluminium for sulfur plasma when you hit tier two and it seems like a really good option.tl;dr, the tritium/fission converion method is...good?
I wonder what the math would be on power-saved. Taking away a neutron deflector is going to reduce the efficiency of the reactor, but the impression I get is that its a really tiny drop in the ocean given how much tritium you can generate so quickly.Yeah, it's ludicrously fast compared to anything else. A max conversion rate of nearly 1200mB per second from a single reactor if you could somehow supply enough lithium. Add in that you'll probably be wanting an automatic clay production system anyway for the lithium/aluminium for sulfur plasma when you hit tier two and it seems like a really good option.
Plus you're running a nuclear reactor anyway so that's still going to be providing a modicum of power.
You don't have to convert it to Tritium in your power production ....I wonder what the math would be on power-saved. Taking away a neutron deflector is going to reduce the efficiency of the reactor, but the impression I get is that its a really tiny drop in the ocean given how much tritium you can generate so quickly.
Added support for the GT5u reactor components.
Added handling of codes for Talonius's old planner, and copy/paste buttons.
Viewing it cost/benefit, that's still using up power production. If I put 5 thorium rods into a well-designed reactor and turn it on, I generally expect it to get 7 efficiency on the old planner. If I remove a neutron reflector, that efficiency will drop.You don't have to convert it to Tritium in your power production ....
A simple nuclear reactor (without extra chambers) with thorium rods and a me system with a level emiter to only turn on when lithium fuel rods are inside.
I was gonna say we can already do this in the old planner (GT tab) but technically you have to infer the fluid-reactor results from the heat production.This is nice ... just noticed
https://github.com/MauveCloud/Ic2ExpReactorPlanner/releases
IC2 Experimental Reactor Planner
Nice now we can simulate a fluid nuclear reactor with thorium cells![]()
I would have been good to know that earlier ... xDI was gonna say we can already do this in the old planner (GT tab) but technically you have to infer the fluid-reactor results from the heat production.
Not quite true. Anything with high enough gravity that isn't too close to a start can retain helium in its atmosphere. That includes gas giants and some of the so-called "super-Earths". As opposed to getting it from stars, we might actually be able to do the gas giant atmosphere extraction, it's just not cost-efficient.
Place lithium rods next to working fuel rods and they get instantly converted. So you need a big enough lithium supply and the rest is complex but cheap automation.
Place lithium rods next to working fuel rods and they get instantly converted. So you need a big enough lithium supply and the rest is complex but cheap automation.
That's an unproven hypothesis for now, and in any case, while it may be more abundant on the moon than on Earth, it's still far below what would be available from gas giants. In any case, it's still not quite clear if helium-3 fusion is viable since it requires significantly higher temperatures for an economically feasible power output.
Uh Miguk are we talking RL hypotheticals or GT stuff atm? I haven't done fusion yet, so I'm keeping an eye on this discussion for clever solutions (that actually existAnd, Deuterium can be harvested from ocean water, so there you have it for fuel.