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

ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 466 posts

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#291

Post by raverbashing »

admax88q wrote: post #201
valuearb wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My software startup was a huge beneficiary of the SSC cancellation, it freed up a nuclear physicist to write graphics software for us, which became one of our biggest products. I’m in favor of pursuing basic research, but there is always a cost. When you take a group of your smartest people and focus them on non-economic activities, the economy loses something.

Do you think that a nuclear physicist writing graphics software rather than doing nuclear physics was a net win for society in the long term?

Well, depends on the nuclear physicist and on the graphics software

Maybe this person had better career successes in the SW field than in the Physics field

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#292

Post by nitrogen »

Aerroon wrote: post #152
landryraccoon wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without giving a strong opinion either way on whether this particular project is a good investment or not : Science, as an institution imo undervalues good marketing and good PR. For profit enterprises are under no illusion that they can succeed without good marketing and public perception. If large expensive projects like this are needed to increase public awareness and support for basic scientific research then I a…

I think a problem with ITER for PR isn't the cost. It's time. I learned about it and got excited more than a decade ago. It'll still take years of time for it to be finished. I'm not really sure how to express this, but the huge amount of time just diminishes the impact of it for me.

Think of it like the construction of a legendary cathedral. The prolonged commitment required is part of its impressiveness.

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#293

Post by korantu »

lmm wrote: post #252
vosper wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nuclear power is the only realistic way to solve the looming energy crisis of the 21st century while still maintaining the same standard of living for everyone I assume by "energy crisis" you mean "how do we continue to generate energy while drastically decreasing climate effects"? Because if we're not worried about climate there's no looming energy crisis. There's plenty of oil, gas, and coal out there still. And…

> And so if we're talking about climate stuff... is nuclear really the only way? Renewables continue to get cheaper and scale up; grid storage with batteries and pumped hydro is already a thing, and plenty of other storage methods are in development, it seems unlikely not a single one of them will turn out to be useful? Maybe one of them will work out. Do you want to bet the planet on that? > Plus, carbon capture for…

To add to your list of currently available proven approaches, would an approach that decarbonized France's energy in just 10 years should also be considered?

It looks like proven track record of decarbonisation if there is one.

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#294

Post by realusername »

dantillberg wrote: post #100
cwhiz wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to see some models on how solar power could work in northern cities, or honestly any city. The NYC metro area has over 23 million residents and there is essentially zero space for a solar farm. In the winter it's cloudy almost all day and there are only 9 hours of sunlight. Rooftop solar is an option but the models I have seen show a theoretical max around 1,200 MW which is about 1/30th of the NYC metro…

You could imagine building a globe-spanning power distribution network. Solar panels on one side of the planet could provide power at night on the other side of the planet.

Electricity transport losses makes that impossible.

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#295

Post by piva00 »

Symbiote wrote: post #198
valuearb wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My software startup was a huge beneficiary of the SSC cancellation, it freed up a nuclear physicist to write graphics software for us, which became one of our biggest products. I’m in favor of pursuing basic research, but there is always a cost. When you take a group of your smartest people and focus them on non-economic activities, the economy loses something.

"The economy" seems to favour the current generation of Einsteins working on optimizing ad impressions for Google, spreading fake news for Facebook and sucking unimaginable amounts of money into Bezos' pocket, the consequences be damned. We could use a lot less of this, and a lot more Einsteins in research laboratories and universities.

At least some of the products in tech are actual products, I'm more sad and frustrated by a generation of Einsteins working in finance...

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#296

Post by adrianN »

xupybd wrote: post #43
vosper wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nuclear power is the only realistic way to solve the looming energy crisis of the 21st century while still maintaining the same standard of living for everyone I assume by "energy crisis" you mean "how do we continue to generate energy while drastically decreasing climate effects"? Because if we're not worried about climate there's no looming energy crisis. There's plenty of oil, gas, and coal out there still. And…

As I understand it renewables and batteries have their own environmental impacts that can't be ignored. When comparing nuclear with renewables the impacts start to show nuclear as at least a good contender as the future power source. But large scale fusion might drastically lower energy costs. That could enable things like carbon capture.

The real issue with nuclear is not the waste, but the time it takes to build the reactors. We don't have enough time left before we irrevocably fuck up the climate. Solar and wind can be brought online much quicker.

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#297

Post by gspr »

foobiekr wrote: post #210
godelski wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This appears to be a problem that is solving itself. Developed countries have birth rates below replacement and more countries are becoming developed (with the same trend happening as those countries develop).

That’s all well and good if you reach stability below a level that is sustainable. We aren’t going to be anywhere near that from an environmental point of view.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30677-2

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#298

Post by ratdragon »

What does HN crowd think of companies like hb11 or lppfusion which try to construct much smaller but still powerful (lpp plans for 5MW, relatively small, reactor. They also want to use a different fuel that produces very little neutrons, thus very low radiocativity. And moreover they do not need thermal part as electricity is generated by directly collecting alpha particles (and some Xrays IIRC). It _feels_ to me like ITER is inheritance from old times - trying to build the reactor the way we always did (i.e. thermal; and also using the "easiest" to ignite fuel - but that produces a lot of radiocativity compared to hB11 fuel). As someone pointed out here in comments, there are already better magnets than those used in ITER even now. Don't get me wrong, it would be sooo cool if ITER succeeded and started fusion energy generation, but it is just taking too long.

  https://www.hb11.energy/our-story https://lppfusion.com/technology/fusion-energy-generator/

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#299

Post by godelski »

foobiekr wrote: post #251
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And whybdo you believe that? We will never surpass 12 billion by most estimates. Where is the sustainability point?

Do you think those 12B people are going to pollute the ocean with less plastic or agricultural runoff?

The last time there was a "population crisis" fertilizer was invented the problem vanished. Currently GMOs have shown they produce massive improvements in yields and we're still in the early phases of this research. So it isn't exactly naive to think that this won't be an issue (though I'm not saying you should completely dismiss it).

As for land, well Europe is the same size as America and has twice the population. And neither have anywhere near the density that China or India does. So there's quite a bit of evidence that we shouldn't be overly concerned about these issues.

And what looks like the best way to solve them is by helping other countries develop more rapidly (which is actually a bonus for tackling climate change too!) but this is a pretty unpopular opinion.

Post reply on HN