| Nuclear fusion breakthrough 10:40 - Dec 13 with 3012 views | StokieBlue |
Researchers at the US national ignition facility have managed to get the first ever net positive energy release from a fusion process. It's a very modest amount, only 0.4 MJ (enough to boil a kettle) but it's a fairly big deal as nobody has achieved a positive energy release from a fusion process before. The researchers haven't published yet but it's being widely reported.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/12/breakthrough-in-nuclear-fusi
It's a long, long way from being a viable baseline power source but it's a step forward with the caveats that the energy that went into the lasers wasn't included in the output calculation but because it's an experiment rather than a reactor that wasn't optimised anyway.
SB |  | | |  |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:31 - Dec 13 with 2877 views | Bent_double |
This came up on my phone this morning, and I got a bit excited at the prospect of this becoming a reality....but lets be honest (and I know next to nothing about this), it's probably decades away from appearing in the real world.
But still excellent news. |  |
| |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:33 - Dec 13 with 2871 views | EdwardStone |
Big expensive shiny Nuclear power will spring to our energy-rescue
I assume it will be too cheap to meter.....lol
I am fully prepared to eat humble pie if my scepticism is misplaced |  | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:40 - Dec 13 with 2840 views | ronnyd |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:33 - Dec 13 by EdwardStone |
Big expensive shiny Nuclear power will spring to our energy-rescue
I assume it will be too cheap to meter.....lol
I am fully prepared to eat humble pie if my scepticism is misplaced |
I wonder how much of the stuff that featured on Tomorrow's World over the years it was on, actually made it into manufacture? |  | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:47 - Dec 13 with 2813 views | EdwardStone |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:40 - Dec 13 by ronnyd |
I wonder how much of the stuff that featured on Tomorrow's World over the years it was on, actually made it into manufacture? |
I don't know the exact amount, but I do remember watching Judith Hann smearing a prototype cd with marmalade and popping it in to play
Or was it honey
I disremember
And a fax machine....and a car that killed the engine every time it was stationery.
Loads, now you come to mention | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:48 - Dec 13 with 2798 views | bournemouthblue |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:33 - Dec 13 by EdwardStone |
Big expensive shiny Nuclear power will spring to our energy-rescue
I assume it will be too cheap to meter.....lol
I am fully prepared to eat humble pie if my scepticism is misplaced |
Fusion is potentially the future, it's always 10 to 20 years off but would produce significantly less Nuclear waste than existing Fission stations
It's waste only remains radioactive for 100 years before returning to safe levels
We will see, Nuclear energy once running is generally pretty low carbon power, the problem is the waste |  |
| |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:50 - Dec 13 with 2782 views | GeoffSentence |
I got quite thrilled about that when I saw it, but this bit "the energy that went into the lasers wasn't included in the output calculation " dulled my enthusiasm.
The premise of it seems to be that they have finally got fusion to generate more energy than is input into the reaction so long as you dont count all the input energy. |  |
| |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:53 - Dec 13 with 2766 views | StokieBlue |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:50 - Dec 13 by GeoffSentence |
I got quite thrilled about that when I saw it, but this bit "the energy that went into the lasers wasn't included in the output calculation " dulled my enthusiasm.
The premise of it seems to be that they have finally got fusion to generate more energy than is input into the reaction so long as you dont count all the input energy. |
That's certainly a fair point, although their argument around that was the facility wasn't designed as a fusion research centre but as a laser weapons research centre and was repurposed. Given this the lasers being used aren't optimised as they would be in a reactor system.
You're completely right though, in reality that energy also needs to be included in the calculation. It's a good step but we are still quite some way off in reality.
SB | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:53 - Dec 13 with 2757 views | ronnyd |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:47 - Dec 13 by EdwardStone |
I don't know the exact amount, but I do remember watching Judith Hann smearing a prototype cd with marmalade and popping it in to play
Or was it honey
I disremember
And a fax machine....and a car that killed the engine every time it was stationery.
Loads, now you come to mention |
I'm sure that there's a hellova lot of stuff we have completely forgotten about too.  | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:53 - Dec 13 with 2758 views | NthQldITFC |
The tone does sound promising doesn't it. They say in that Guardian article that they got 2.5MJ out after using 2.1MJ "to heat the fuel with lasers". Is your caveat referring to laser efficiency? Is the 2.1MJ the output energy from the laser and there's a significant overhead inside the laser 'box'?
For an efficient operational process you'd have to include everything from providing and pumping the source for the hydrogen (presumably water?), electrolysis, then pumping a heat-exchange system etc., etc. I wonder what sort of gain is required before it becomes viable?
I guess the researchers will be holding a press conference and addressing the press in comically high-pitched squeaky voices! |  |
| |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:10 - Dec 13 with 2700 views | StokieBlue |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 12:53 - Dec 13 by NthQldITFC |
The tone does sound promising doesn't it. They say in that Guardian article that they got 2.5MJ out after using 2.1MJ "to heat the fuel with lasers". Is your caveat referring to laser efficiency? Is the 2.1MJ the output energy from the laser and there's a significant overhead inside the laser 'box'?
For an efficient operational process you'd have to include everything from providing and pumping the source for the hydrogen (presumably water?), electrolysis, then pumping a heat-exchange system etc., etc. I wonder what sort of gain is required before it becomes viable?
I guess the researchers will be holding a press conference and addressing the press in comically high-pitched squeaky voices! |
So I've looked into this a bit more and it's complicated.
The 192 lasers used to achieve the reaction used 500 MJ of energy to impart 2.1 MJ of energy onto the pellet which was being used to induce the fusion reaction. This reaction then release 2.5 MJ of energy (net positive for the reaction itself).
So whilst that is very cool it's clearly only a start and there are a few caveats:
- The lasers used are from the early 1990s and are horribly inefficient when compared to modern technology. Modern lasers are at least x20 more efficient and could be up to two orders of magnitude more efficient depending on design.
- The capacitors are also 1990's technology and once again horribly inefficient.
The goal here was to try and get the Q factor of the reaction above 1, this specifically means the difference between the energy imparted into the reaction and the energy from the reaction. That is why this is important, if they can increase this a few times then it would be at the point where it's worth building a new facility with modern technology to try and get the full process to be net positive in energy.
From Wiki:
"A fusion energy gain factor, usually expressed with the symbol Q, is the ratio of fusion power produced in a nuclear fusion reactor to the power required to maintain the plasma in steady state. The condition of Q = 1, when the power being released by the fusion reactions is equal to the required heating power, is referred to as breakeven, or in some sources, scientific breakeven."
SB | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:11 - Dec 13 with 2701 views | itfc_bucks |
I used to work at a reasonably decent level within the UK Atomic Energy Authority and the UK/European efforts to produce sustainable and commercially viable fusion energy.
The NIF report is interesting, but as a methodology, it's unlikely to ever generate sustainable fusion which would be required to make anything commercially viable, due to the complexity of capturing the energy released.
The more likely pathway to fusion energy is via the Tokamak method, as we're following with the EU at ITER in France and here in the UK via STEP - https://step.ukaea.uk/ | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:15 - Dec 13 with 2677 views | ghostofescobar |
Good news for Big Oil, in that they have plenty of time to brief against fusion produced energy, much as they have done against climate change over the past couple of decades. |  |
| |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:22 - Dec 13 with 2656 views | StokieBlue |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:11 - Dec 13 by itfc_bucks |
I used to work at a reasonably decent level within the UK Atomic Energy Authority and the UK/European efforts to produce sustainable and commercially viable fusion energy.
The NIF report is interesting, but as a methodology, it's unlikely to ever generate sustainable fusion which would be required to make anything commercially viable, due to the complexity of capturing the energy released.
The more likely pathway to fusion energy is via the Tokamak method, as we're following with the EU at ITER in France and here in the UK via STEP - https://step.ukaea.uk/ |
ITER is also a very cool project, I believe that the highest Q factor a Tokamak has achieved thus far is ~0.6 but modelling does show that a large enough Tokamak based reactor could have a Q value of 10 or more.
We are quite a way off that but it's promising research and collaboration between countries is always a promising way to go.
With regards to the NIF method, it's certainly not viable yet but with appropriate use of modern technology it could be part of the solution. I assume they would capture the heat of the reaction to drive turbines but that is not very efficient - I can't see anything saying how exactly they want to harness the energy created.
Also worth noting that ITER is trying to create reactions which last for 600 seconds rather than fractions of a second like the current NIF reactions.
SB | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 15:18 - Dec 13 with 2500 views | itfc_bucks |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:22 - Dec 13 by StokieBlue |
ITER is also a very cool project, I believe that the highest Q factor a Tokamak has achieved thus far is ~0.6 but modelling does show that a large enough Tokamak based reactor could have a Q value of 10 or more.
We are quite a way off that but it's promising research and collaboration between countries is always a promising way to go.
With regards to the NIF method, it's certainly not viable yet but with appropriate use of modern technology it could be part of the solution. I assume they would capture the heat of the reaction to drive turbines but that is not very efficient - I can't see anything saying how exactly they want to harness the energy created.
Also worth noting that ITER is trying to create reactions which last for 600 seconds rather than fractions of a second like the current NIF reactions.
SB |
The Tokamak model and the use of Lithium based "breeder blankets" feeding the continued reaction will be key, as will be the Diverter technology, capturing the byproduct (He) of the fusion reaction.
This is a double benefit, as we are looking at an imminent threat of a global Helium shortage. This is bad news, even if you can live without squeaky voices and floaty balloons as we use Helium in superconductors for things hospital scanners and such like.
Both technological developments are being spearheaded by the UK. As a result of our EU membership and having the JET experiment based here, we have become world-leaders.
Another rarely acknowledged benefit of EU membership.
A debate for another day... | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 17:54 - Dec 13 with 2398 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
Personally I prefer anaerobic digestion. |  |
| |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 20:53 - Dec 13 with 2233 views | Meadowlark |
Don't know how old you are, but we get "Nuclear Fusion is only 10 years away" news every 10 years. |  | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 22:07 - Dec 13 with 2155 views | StokieBlue |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 20:53 - Dec 13 by Meadowlark |
Don't know how old you are, but we get "Nuclear Fusion is only 10 years away" news every 10 years. |
I'm aware that is historically the case.
Perhaps read the articles and related information? It's a good advance and worth highlighting.
SB | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 23:40 - Dec 13 with 2060 views | StokieBlue |
The actual announcement is out now and they actually put in 2.05MJ and the reaction released 3.15MJ which is quite a lot more than the original stories.
SB | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:19 - Dec 14 with 1808 views | RIPbobby |
Cold fusion will be the planets saviour. |  | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 15:34 - Dec 14 with 1736 views | EdwardStone |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:19 - Dec 14 by RIPbobby |
Cold fusion will be the planets saviour. |
I genuienely hope you are right
And I really wish I could share your optimism | | | |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 17:30 - Dec 14 with 1676 views | tractordownsouth |
No doubt the green party will oppose it. |  |
| |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 19:16 - Dec 14 with 1627 views | NthQldITFC |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:19 - Dec 14 by RIPbobby |
Cold fusion will be the planets saviour. |
With a different timescale it certainly could have been but if this succeeds, brilliant an energy source as it is, by the time it is operational on a worldwide scale it will be far, far too late for much of nature and for a very large number of humans.
What we must not do is relax and see this as a magical and imminent solution to our existential problems. Somehow we need to wake ourselves up.
We are in deep, deep sh!t and need to stop pretending it's not happening, and act right now. | |
| |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 19:23 - Dec 14 with 1618 views | StokieBlue |
| Nuclear fusion breakthrough on 13:19 - Dec 14 by RIPbobby |
Cold fusion will be the planets saviour. |
Cold fusion is nonsense.
Please contribute actual science.
SB | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
