Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

ipp.mpg.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 223 posts

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#101

Post by 08-15 »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #2

"Although Wendelstein 7-X is not designed to generate energy, the device is intended to prove that stellarators are suitable for use in power stations. With Wendelstein 7-X the intention is to achieve for the first time in a stellarator the quality of confinement afforded by competing devices of the tokamak type." This was at the very end. While competition is certainly a positive, this doesn't sound like they're int…

60 years ago, when nobody knew anything about fusion (so not a very different situation from today...), the stellarator was the favored design. The advantages are obvious on paper (which is all they had back then): continuous operation, more stable plasma. But then the Russians built a small tokamak and it worked surprisingly well. So the whole world went

"given the importance of fusion, shouldn't the time and effort being put into stellarators be devoted to something that's important in the immediate?"

and started working on tokamaks. 60 years later, tokamaks still haven't been turned into power plants. Things were harder than imagined, and much more expensive, too. It doesn't look as if ITER will ever yield something practical. Maybe the MIT guys can make the Arc Reactor a reality; but all they have right now is... exactly, paper.

(The whole world? No! A tiny village outside Munich built the Wendelstein series of stellarators...)

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#102

Post by regularfry »

regularfry wrote: post #76
ChuckMcM wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is odd that you mention this, unless your name is Karl and were at lunch last Wednesday :-), because it came up as something that companies with big cash hoards might actually be thinking about. Consider the notion that at some point a feasible fusion power plant design becomes "known". Then its a question of money to build one or two or 10. And a company like Google or Apple, with a large cash hoard could jump in…

Robert Bussard shopped his wiffleball fusor design to Google a few years back in a talk that's somewhere on YouTube. Fascinating stuff.

Link: https://youtu.be/rk6z1vP4Eo8

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#103

Post by bassman9000 »

abundant wrote: post #78
bassman9000 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The conversation came up because I was trying to fathom why a company would sit on billions of dollars when they could make more billions with it They already are, in the cheapest, riskless way possible: those massive cash stashes are sustaining, or even boosting, their valuations. When a company grows too big, it's in its best interest, as in investors best interest, not to spend a few billions on an initiative that…

I think the point was not that a company like Apple ought to invest their billions into ongoing fusion research, indeed the exact opposite: it might be more rational for a company like Apple to hide their billions under a mattress, so that they can make a single, economy-controlling investment on the very same day that profitable fusion power becomes merely a problem of capital.

on the very same day that profitable fusion power becomes merely a problem of capital.

Wouldn't that be too late? Or, put it this way: it is already a problem of capital. If you have enough, you can explore all technology tree branches till finding the one that leads you to it, even in parallel.

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#104

Post by i_am_proteus »

mpweiher wrote: post #93
gmueckl wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhh... are you aware that the 7-X design was computed in the late 80s? It was just an enormous challenge to build this thing. Things like building and validating the field coils required a lot of effort and some novel approaches that they had to come up with along the way.

> 7-X design was computed in the late 80s? Source for that? Looking at the German Wikipedia entry, the HELIAS method was invented in the late 80s. I don't see anything about the 7-X design actually having been computed back then. In fact, even the 2002 experiment Wendelstein 7-AS wasn't fully optimised. Also, Tokamaks were invented in the 1950s. JET started operating in 1983. ITER was proposed in 1987. Given even jus…

Another factor in W7-X being possible today and not a few decades ago, from my understanding, is the proliferation of and improvements in precision of CNC tools. All the design computations in the world go to waste if it can't be built to spec. Which it can be, today, at a reasonable cost.

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#105

Post by idontpost »

ttul wrote: post #84
cygx wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very possible that we could throw trillions of dollars at this and still not figure it out. Possible, but unlikely (imo). It's just that private business doesn't really do large-scale multi-decade pure research efforts with far-off ROI, and governments have chosen to spend money elsewhere. Hence, progress is steady, but slow.

Yes. It’s a classic market failure. We see examples of this type of thing throughout history. For instance, without the Manhattan Program, civil nuclear power would not have developed, because the enormous investment in risky technology development would not have flowed from the private sector.

> For instance, without the Manhattan Program, civil nuclear power would not have developed, because the enormous investment in risky technology development would not have flowed from the private sector.

I don't buy this. Generating electricity from fission is stupid simple once you figure out that piling a bunch of uranium produces heat (literally what Fermi did in Chicago in '42).

The safety features to keep the whole thing regulated, not melting, and to avoid poisoning everyone around it obviously aren't simple, but the process of creating and capturing energy as electricity is.

By contrast, the process of capturing the energy and converting it is a huge part of the challenge with fusion.

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#106

Post by jl6 »

tlb wrote: post #65

If this ends up being the right design for fusion, it may be the most weirdly shaped human artifact, where the shape is fundamental to its operation and not decorative. It's far more complex than a mere turbine blade or venturi. Or can anyone suggest a weirder one? (Define weirdness as the Kolmogorov complexity of the shape, within the precision needed to work properly.)

Does a CPU count? The functional part is a very precise, complex and intricate shape.

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#107

Post by ksec »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #64
lifeformed wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A company like Apple has a quarter trillion in cash laying around, they could jump start fusion and control near-limitless energy in several decades. I wish there was more of a visionary drive among institutions for intellectual curiosity and pushing the boundaries of humankind. And yes, I know why they don't... shareholders business plans risk blah blah blah. Reality is just so BORING. Maybe one day we'll find a way…

It is odd that you mention this, unless your name is Karl and were at lunch last Wednesday :-), because it came up as something that companies with big cash hoards might actually be thinking about. Consider the notion that at some point a feasible fusion power plant design becomes "known". Then its a question of money to build one or two or 10. And a company like Google or Apple, with a large cash hoard could jump in…

Would the idea not be easier if they continue to do what they do, be the largest solar energy producer? Apple Energy should continue to invest and sell Renewable energy where they make sense. And see any excess power to the grid, forcing all of their partners, Mobile Network, (e.g All of Apple iPhone Contract subscribers energy usage are on renewable energy), Foxconn, DHL, TSMC, Memory and NAND Fab, Materials, LCD / OLED Screens, Camera, etc All part of the Apple Ecosystem, from Design, Manufacturer, Assemble, Shipping and Delivery, and iCloud usage, Campus, Back Office, Retail are All on Renewable energy. At least in the form of Credit, that should be the 100% Renewable Energy Goal Apple tries to Achieve. In the scale of Apple manufacturing supply Chain and solar energy pricing, buying Energy from Apple "should" actually be cheaper than non-renewable energy. Imagine the tag line, Every bit of Apple is renewable.

But like everything Apple these days, they are just slow. Their Datacenter expansion already started late, and now with all the set back they are also much further behind. Similar to their Solar Energy which depends and linked to their DataCenter Expansion. And instead of spending money on their CDN ( Which they finally get around to doing so ), built their World Wide WiFi Network, ( iPhone users can enjoy free WiFi access like in Apple Store, but in far more places ), they decided to spend BILLIONS in making TV series and Drama.

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#108

Post by marshray »

tlb wrote: post #65

If this ends up being the right design for fusion, it may be the most weirdly shaped human artifact, where the shape is fundamental to its operation and not decorative. It's far more complex than a mere turbine blade or venturi. Or can anyone suggest a weirder one? (Define weirdness as the Kolmogorov complexity of the shape, within the precision needed to work properly.)

I nominate the latest Ubuntu Desktop or Windows install DVD for title of the most complex item in the known universe.

(For comparison, the human genome is under a GiB.)

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#109

Post by maxxxxx »

lifeformed wrote: post #27
ttul wrote: post #3

Experiments like Wendelstein remind me that the only thing holding back fusion power is money for research like this. Every year, we spend billions on fossil fuel exploration because the return on investment is quick - just think about all the wells going in to extract shale oil. What if we collectively had the will to invest this much into fusion?

A company like Apple has a quarter trillion in cash laying around, they could jump start fusion and control near-limitless energy in several decades. I wish there was more of a visionary drive among institutions for intellectual curiosity and pushing the boundaries of humankind. And yes, I know why they don't... shareholders business plans risk blah blah blah. Reality is just so BORING. Maybe one day we'll find a way…

They just made the Macbook 3mm thinner. That should count for something.

Re: Successful second round of fusion experiments with Wendelstein 7-X

#110

Post by jimjansen1 »

nine_k wrote: post #12

With fusion devices having trouble to confine the plasma for long times, I wonder if a massively-parallel fusion plant woud be feasible. Let's assume that plasma destabilisation does not damage the device, and is a mundane event. Build 10 or even 20 fusion devices (economy of scale!) feeding the common heat buffer, e.g. a large reservoir of a molten salt or metal. Feed conventional turbines off the heat of the heat t…

WOAH GUYS THIS GUY ON THE INTERNET JUST SOLVED FUSION. lol
Post reply on HN