MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
1–10 of 74 posts
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#2Heres a big presentation about it from 2016.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=KkpqA8yG9T4
I'm stoked that it is happening!
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#3Go ENI! It's amazing how an Italian Oil and Gas company is working hard to collaborate with research with the aim of revolutionizing energy extraction.
This is inspiring and giving hope on the future.
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#4Fusion is still exciting, but with normal renewable (solar, wind) costs plummeting the way they are is there still such a compelling case for pouring money into fusion? This one aims to produce a working plant within 15 years. I'm not sure that any of the other efforts are closer to being viable (if they work at all). That's the kind of time frame in which we may master offshore wind and grid-attached storage like the Tesla batteries. Might not even need fusion at the point.
(Except maybe for spacecraft, in the much more distant future)
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#5Fusion is still exciting, but with normal renewable (solar, wind) costs plummeting the way they are is there still such a compelling case for pouring money into fusion? This one aims to produce a working plant within 15 years. I'm not sure that any of the other efforts are closer to being viable (if they work at all). That's the kind of time frame in which we may master offshore wind and grid-attached storage like th…
Solar and wind will never be enough to cover all energy demand. It is a common misconception, it is not even possible to reduce energy consumption to low enough that solar and wind would be sufficient.
If we want to stop burning fuel, we must research nuclear. Of course it is unlikely that we would stop burning fuel any time soon, and that's why 15 years is unfortunately not an inconvenient timeline.
If you're interested in the numbers behind this argument I highly recommend the book "Sustainable energy without the hot air".
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#6Fusion is still exciting, but with normal renewable (solar, wind) costs plummeting the way they are is there still such a compelling case for pouring money into fusion? This one aims to produce a working plant within 15 years. I'm not sure that any of the other efforts are closer to being viable (if they work at all). That's the kind of time frame in which we may master offshore wind and grid-attached storage like th…
Solar and wind will never be enough to cover all energy demand. It is a common misconception, it is not even possible to reduce energy consumption to low enough that solar and wind would be sufficient. If we want to stop burning fuel, we must research nuclear. Of course it is unlikely that we would stop burning fuel any time soon, and that's why 15 years is unfortunately not an inconvenient timeline. If you're intere…
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Solar and wind will never be enough to cover all energy demand. It is a common misconception, it is not even possible to reduce energy consumption to low enough that solar and wind would be sufficient. If we want to stop burning fuel, we must research nuclear. Of course it is unlikely that we would stop burning fuel any time soon, and that's why 15 years is unfortunately not an inconvenient timeline. If you're intere…
https://www.inverse.com/article/34239-how-many-solar-panels-...
Right, as Musk said, we're going to need a mixture of nuclear and wind. If my calculations are correct you need about 500.000 windmills to cover electricity demand in the US. But electricity demand is only a small fraction of total energy use.
How much energy do all cars in the US use? How much do tractors working the fields? How much do factories burning their own? How much do ships transporting goods? How much do planes flying around? How much do factories in China making our goods? Or mining operations in Indonesia or Congo mining our materials?
If you look at the full picture of sustainable energy, you'll find that covering electricity use by spending a trillion dollars on a 100x100 mile wind farm is a cool idea and a step in the direction, but it's only a step. There's a whole journey ahead of us, and that's what that book teaches.
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#8Fusion is still exciting, but with normal renewable (solar, wind) costs plummeting the way they are is there still such a compelling case for pouring money into fusion? This one aims to produce a working plant within 15 years. I'm not sure that any of the other efforts are closer to being viable (if they work at all). That's the kind of time frame in which we may master offshore wind and grid-attached storage like th…
With fusion we could power systems dedicated to pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere.
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#9Cheap nuclear fusion energy would be a great human achievement. I do wonder about its effects on society though. Any reading containing well reasoned speculation on that? Here's what I can think of myself.
* A cheaper, cleaner energy source might outcompete fossil fuel. Less air polution, yay!
* Cheaper energy would significantly increase energy consumption. Think Jevons paradox[0]. The effect of that increased heat production on global warming can't be good...
* Globally stabilising geopolitical effect. Less dependence on geographically confined scarce energy resources like Middle Eastern/Siberian/Venezuelan oil, Sahara sun, ... thanks to a globally available basic resource.
Any other obvious effects I'm missing?
Re: MIT and newly formed company launch effort to build compact tokamak pilot plant
#10Fusion is still exciting, but with normal renewable (solar, wind) costs plummeting the way they are is there still such a compelling case for pouring money into fusion? This one aims to produce a working plant within 15 years. I'm not sure that any of the other efforts are closer to being viable (if they work at all). That's the kind of time frame in which we may master offshore wind and grid-attached storage like th…
Solar and wind will never be enough to cover all energy demand. It is a common misconception, it is not even possible to reduce energy consumption to low enough that solar and wind would be sufficient. If we want to stop burning fuel, we must research nuclear. Of course it is unlikely that we would stop burning fuel any time soon, and that's why 15 years is unfortunately not an inconvenient timeline. If you're intere…
Came here to say the same thing. Anytime an energy discussion comes up, I try to help dispell this myth that wind and solar will solve all our problems, especially in the global context of rising energy needs. If you care about the enviroment and our future on this planet, it behooves you to look into nuclear research and get uptodate. I would love to see us solve the clean energy problem fully this century, and the key factor is going to be nuclear.