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

171–180 of 223 posts

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

#171

Post by ajmurmann »

amelius wrote: post #89
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…

The problem might be that patents are only valid for about 20 years. That might be the time required to perfect the technology and reach the break-even point.

During those twenty years you'd certainly continue to easily produce more innovation and refined designs that would result in more related patents that would provide a healthy buffer between what you can do and what your competitors are capable of.

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

#173

Post by pfdietz »

DennisP wrote: post #168
pfdietz wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to shake my head at TAE, since their approach was brutally critiqued 20 years ago. It turns out being given $500M doesn't let you evade the laws of physics. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235032059_Comments_...

I'm not a fusion scientist so I can't really judge, but in general I'm not sure it makes sense to say "it turns out" unless you know that experiments have proven it correct. From some quick googling it appears that TAE people responded to the critique and other people thought they made some valid points; see page 4 in this paper: http://w3fusion.ph.utexas.edu/ifs/ifsreports/919_wong.pdf Things seem to be going pretty…

TAE has recently begun pivoting, for example trying to use their technology for cancer treatment(!). Their name change was part of this. Generally a company doesn't do something like that unless they are forced to.

TAE's response was not at all strong, IMO. And that was not the only critique.

Plasma confinement is not the issue for TAE. The problem is even with perfect confinement, their non-Maxwellian scheme doesn't work.

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

#174

Post by beambot »

> The result was high plasma densities of up to 2 x 1020 particles per cubic meter – values that are sufficient for a future power station. At the same time, the ions and electrons of the hydrogen plasma reached an impressive temperature of 20 million degrees Celsius.

> Since the fusion fire only ignites at temperatures of over 100 million degrees, the fuel [...]

Would it be accurate to say that this gets us 20% of the way there, or is that overly simplistic?

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

#175

Post by shoyer »

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…

Google is investing in fusion energy: https://ai.google/stories/applied-science/

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

#176

Post by sonnyblarney »

philwelch wrote: post #127
jerf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Stellerator, or any of its descendants, turn out to be the answer to practical fusion, it would have been contingent on vast quantities of computational power being available cheaply. It does not matter how much money you poured into your Stellerator project in 1970, you could never have built the 7-X, because there would have been no way to produce that design in the first place. Personally, I think one of th…

> Personally, I think one of the answers to "tech seems to have stalled" is that it's easy to underestimate how important cheap computational power is, even without "AI", to moving forward. For another example, as fantastic as the 1960s space projects may have been, I think they just weren't economically sustainable, so it isn't that amazing that they didn't become a self-sustaining industry right away. I think it's…

Excellent Post!

You should do a Netflix series, Phil!

Plus: GPS, Combustion Engine, The Web / Networking, Plastics/Chem revolution, and maybe soon AI?

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

#177

Post by sonnyblarney »

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?

Fully agree but the same could be applied to solar and energy storage as well.

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

#178

Post by mrep »

bseidensticker wrote: post #40
hyperbovine wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err no, money is not "the only thing" keeping us from having fusion power. I can think of one other thing which is that it's damn hard to create stellar-core conditions inside of a small containment vessel on Earth. It's not obvious that throwing more money at the problem is going to change this. After all, fusion research has been funded in some form or another since the 1950s. I'll bet if you added up all the resea…

We are spending a relatively pitiful amount of money on fusion power research. The US has spent $29B TOTAL in 2010 dollars from the 1950s through 2010. (I couldn't easily find global numbers, but I can't imagine it's more than an order of magnitude higher) Some other numbers for comparison: NASA's current ANNUAL budget is $19B. [1] The BP oil spill cost $40B. [2] "A 2016 IMF study estimated that global fossil fuel su…

>>It's not obvious that throwing more money at the problem is going to change this.

>This is true, but we haven't funded it enough. The potential upside is insane. We aren't funding research accordingly.

How much money do you propose we throw at it then because even fission isn't profitable these days and that is something we know how to do. While I agree that it is worth something to pursue, wind/solar + batteries + smart grid are a way better investment these days since we cannot even produce a fusion reactor that is net positive in energy let alone economical.

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

#179

Post by red75prime »

Retric wrote: post #43
nine_k wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is a huge range of great options for storing electricity Producers of wind and solar power would love to hear about them! Re SPOF: since the fusion devices are much less reliable, as of now, than reservoirs of hot liquids, I suppose the reservoir is much less of a concern. I understand that fusion efficiency grows with size; this is why we are surrounded with colossal self-initiated fusion reactions, and have…

> Maby we could still Early computers where huge and broke down all the time. They where built that way because it was the easiest option at the time. Nobody wants to build multi billion dollar devices if you could get away with spending 1/10th as much or even test several designs at the same time they would. PS: The grid absorbs solar and wind interment nature just fine without much in the way of storage. That might…

> The grid absorbs solar and wind interment nature just fine without much in the way of storage

Not so fine, judging by [0] (page 57): "Ontario has committed to install about 2,500 MW of solar capacity in both its 2010 and 2013 Long Term Energy Plan.70 However, Ontario also has committed to install 7,500 MW of wind generation. These two commitments combined create a serious energy management problem for Ontario’s power system engineers and operators."

And they have hydroelectric, nuclear, natural-gas power plants, and sell electricity to neighboring states to compensate intermittent power supply.

[0]: https://www.ospe.on.ca/downloads/March-2016-Research-Report

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

#180

Post by scardine »

simonh wrote: post #134
jgust wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that long ago (1980's?) it was said that no one really needed a personal computer, and that no one would buy one.

I programmed microcomputers in the 70s as a kid.

In the late 70's the rich boy of the neighborhood got a zx-spectrum clone (rich kids toy in Brazil at the time) but I was the only kid of the bunch that thought programming in basic was fun - all of my friends just wanted to load Kung Fu Mater[1] from the tape recorder. Crazy, games were stored into analog audio k7[2] tapes back then.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgO4HtWIJjQ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassette_tape

Post reply on HN