[JamesP81]

What benefit would cold fusion bring to the world if it did exist?

I think the idea isn't to have a fusion reaction that doesn't generate heat, but to have one that can be maintained at room temperature. As it is, the only large scale fusion reactors in use are hydrogen bombs, which require the detonation of an atomic bomb just to get the reaction started. I think the idea is to get a fusion reaction started without the whole nuclear blast thing.

[thackney]

I think the idea isn't to have a fusion reaction that doesn't generate heat, but to have one that can be maintained at room temperature.

That was my question. Nuclear power plants work by putting heat to work to generate steam to turn a turbine to turn a generator that provides electricity. Generating Helium is good for party balloons but not generating useful power.

A previous responder said cold fusion meant relatively cold as compared with other fusion reactors using heat similar to that of the sun, a heat level difficult to contain and use.

But a room temperature reaction provides no energy that we could easily convert into traditional power. Unless there was an associated flow of electrons that can be contained and directed, I don't understand how a truly cold (room temperature) reaction has any benefit beyond greater understanding of physics that might lead to another more useful discovery.

I am an engineer. I think in terms of application. If it generates hundreds of degrees of temperature rise instead of tens of thousands, that is useful. If it generates ten degrees of temperature rise, that is not, at least not for power generation.