• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged How Close is power from Nuclear Fusion

This result, when it is confirmed, is a Big Thing. We've known that over-unity nuclear fusion should be possible - we've had the numbers for that for decades - but this is the first time it has actually been demonstrated in the lab. It's moved from "this is theoretically possible, we just have to work out how to do it" to "we know how to do it now".

There's still a long way to go before fusion power is put on the grid. This is one step among many. But it is a definite step. The concept has been proved. We hadn't had that yet.

I'm noticing that this recent thing was done with lasers, not magnetic confinement.

Using lasers to spark fusion is not super new, but it is much more recently developed than magnetic fusion. Which matters in terms of timelines, as the old "nuclear fusion power is 20 years away" thing that has been going around for the past seventy years was based on the development of the magnetic containment tokamak designs. Like ITER, for example. Those big Tokamak reactors are huge big engineering projects that can run decades from design to first operation - so by the time ITER goes into operation much of its technology will be decades old already. In contrast there seems to be fairly rapid and steady progress in laser technology.

So this does really seem to be a sign of significant progress.
 
Somewhat related:
hydropower_breakthrough.png
 
I am inordinately amused by the notion that if we ever do achieve a net-positive sustained fusion reaction, we'll probably use it to power a steam engine. It seems like the peak of human civilization is that wherever the energy is coming from, it's all going into some water.
 

Paragraph from the linked article:

For example, last week’s experiment generated 3.15 Megajoules of energy from 2.05 Megajoules of input from the laser. Yet the laser draws about 300 Megajoules from the grid just to operate.

Sooooooooo all they need is to develop a laser that is more than 2 orders of magnitude more efficient, for this technology to actually generate surplus power. :rolleyes:
 
What I can't figure out is, how any of these fusion technologies can possibly be "scaled up" for commercial power generation. They're already enormous, in ways that strain the limits of materials science, just to reach various conceptual energy break-even levels. What future simplifications or other economizing modifications can be expected or even conceived of? Will megajoule lasers ever be cheaply mass-produced? Will some very clever method of extracting the heat produced by fusing plasma from inside massive superconducting magnets make it possible for that system to be economical, reliable, maintainable, perhaps even compact? I'm not holding my breath.

If you have any imagination, you can see a little model rocket reaching a mile in altitude, and imagine scaling that up to something like a Saturn V to reach the moon. But if the model rocket had to be the size of a Saturn V just to reach a mile in altitude, what would be the path from there for getting to the moon?
 
"It's just over the horizon."

Definition of "horizon": an imaginary line that always remains the same distance from the observer.
 
I just heard and watched a rather garbled report of this latest announcement on a local TV station (CP24, if you must know). The interviewer did not have a clue what she was talking about but the Professor of Physics she was speaking with did finish with the statement that things were still "about 20 years away".

:D
 
What I can't figure out is, how any of these fusion technologies can possibly be "scaled up" for commercial power generation.
You don't get it. The important thing is that it requires huge investment and will only be commercially viable when 'scaled up'. That way it remains in the hands of 'big energy' and can make a few individuals incredibly rich while poor consumers foot the bill.

Just imagine if all this research effort had been put into renewable energy and storage that works at all scales. Power generation could become decentralized with individual households all contributing and benefiting from it. Capitalists hate that communist model. They want us to be mere consumers so they can continue exploiting us and become even richer!

But we aren't close to that anyway, and probably never will be. This latest announcement is just more smoke and mirrors. It's a simple scam - keep stringing everybody along (including naive investors and even 'big energy' itself ) while you make big bucks doing research with no hope of a return. And the news media is complicant:-

The Globe and Mail said:
Fusion breakthrough could be climate, energy game-changer
Er, no - it won't be.

While the announcement does not immediately change the timeline for when fusion could be made practical, it adds to the growing sense of momentum in a field long regarded as offering a scientifically feasible but technically challenging solution to the world’s energy needs.
Keeping the scam rolling! :(

Thanks to public excitement and the urgent need to cut fossil fuel emissions that drive climate change, the development could indirectly boost prospects for several private companies that are working on quicker pathways to commercial fusion power.
Well that's a relief. Here we were getting all anxious about global warming and having to cut back on burning filthy fossil fuels, but now we can relax and carry on with business as usual because private companies are getting it sorted. The Invisible Hand of the Market always provides! :rolleyes:

Now that a net energy gain has been achieved with the target, researchers said the next step is making the process more efficient and easily reproduced.
No, it hasn't! You can't just look at one tiny part of the process and ignore the rest! ("Oh yes we can - just watch us...").

“A few decades of research on the underlying technologies could put us in a position to build a power plant,” said Kim Budil, director of the laboratory.
Aha, the real goal of this 'experiment' - another few decades of funding! Meanwhile the temperature and damage continues to rise. We don't have another few decades to piss away on diversions like this. :mad:
 
Last edited:
The real question is - how far will we go down this rabbit hole before realizing it's a dead end? I'm afraid I won't live long enough to find out...

It could be worse though. Imagine someone made a real breakthrough and achieved actual output > input. But it turns out once you get that tiny sun going you don't need expensive deuterium fuel. Why, you can just chuck in any old matter and it will continue growing without any external input! Like the walls of the containment vessel, the building, the ground...
 
The real question is - how far will we go down this rabbit hole before realizing it's a dead end?

What's the appropriate word for it? The sunk cost fallacy? The gambler's fallacy?

We've invested so much time and money already, we can never give up!

I'm getting more and more pessimistic about it myself. The recent major setback at ITER makes me even more pessimistic.

I guess the good news is that at least we aren't putting all of our eggs in this basket.
 
Most research isn't affected by the Sunken Cost Fallacy, as the technology developed can be used for other purposes.

In fact, high-priced megaprojects provide indirect funding for things that would never have seen any money on their own.

Just building laser arrays that fire together precisely in space and time is something that will be useful for other projects.

That's why I'm generally fine with billionaires wasting their money on hail-marry ideas.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom