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

Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 373 posts

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#91

Post by [deleted] »

Retric wrote: post #56
DataDaoDe wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't agree more. Once you realize that energy is the fundamental unit which powers everything else in the economy, not only from every movement of ourselves to those of our machines as well, you realize the more we advance in our ability to produce more and more energy at cheaper and cheaper costs in increasingly reliable ways, the more we can accelerate, without exception, every other industry.

There is ~zero expectation in the scientific community that fusion is going to be cheap at scale. It might eventually be cheaper than fission due to several factors. But, even that’s looking a long way off.

[deleted]

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#92

Post by sam »

Tade0 wrote: post #84
zachrose wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m also a layperson and also a fan of the 7-X, almost on purely aesthetic grounds. The plasma shape is a beautiful twisted loop, the magnets resemble a French crueler, and with the shielding and instrumentation it has all the charm of a steampunk time machine

To me it looks like alien technology. Such an organic shape. So many valves an openings. What is their purpose? How deliberate is their placement? Awe-inspiring.

Most of the ports are used for diagnostic equipment, things like laser interferometers to measure plasma density or other devices to measure plasma temperatures. Also some ports are used to inject neutral beams for heating.

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#93

Post by laurencerowe »

aaronblohowiak wrote: post #58
coldtea wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in the end it's a glorified boiler!

as far as i am aware, solar power is the only prevalent power source that does not derive from spinning a dynamo. Besides wind (and perhaps there, too) almost all of the force used to spin dynamos includes some kind of boiling (eg: dams happen to use the force of the water after the "boil"/evaporation, nuclear, coal, natural gas, etc are all steam-based thermo-mechanical power plants.)

As well as steam engines there are also small scale generators using internal combustion engines and gas turbines which spin the dynamo directly.

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#94

Post by jvm_ »

m0zg wrote: post #88
Retric wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is ~zero expectation in the scientific community that fusion is going to be cheap at scale. It might eventually be cheaper than fission due to several factors. But, even that’s looking a long way off.

How so? Unlimited, non-radioactive fuel and inherent safety of the system alone could tip this scale pretty severely in favor of fusion once it becomes energy-positive. And remember, once that happens, investment is going to be through the roof, which will accelerate progress. Either the "scientific community" (whatever that means) is either too pessimistic about this, or you've just made this up.

It was my understanding that fission and fusion both use the same Nuclear Power Plant sized facility.

Fusion just replaces the radioactive bit, you still need steam/electricity conversion/transmission/cooling... it's not like a suitcase you can plug wires into, you still need a massive 'factory' to make electricity, just the one bit is a safer.

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#95

Post by ben_w »

aaronblohowiak wrote: post #58
coldtea wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in the end it's a glorified boiler!

as far as i am aware, solar power is the only prevalent power source that does not derive from spinning a dynamo. Besides wind (and perhaps there, too) almost all of the force used to spin dynamos includes some kind of boiling (eg: dams happen to use the force of the water after the "boil"/evaporation, nuclear, coal, natural gas, etc are all steam-based thermo-mechanical power plants.)

Certainly the only major electrical generation method, but MHD and thermocouples can be the appropriate solution sometimes, and if you count storage systems as well as primary production, there are also fuel cells & batteries.

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#96

Post by 7373737373 »

Tade0 wrote: post #84
zachrose wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m also a layperson and also a fan of the 7-X, almost on purely aesthetic grounds. The plasma shape is a beautiful twisted loop, the magnets resemble a French crueler, and with the shielding and instrumentation it has all the charm of a steampunk time machine

To me it looks like alien technology. Such an organic shape. So many valves an openings. What is their purpose? How deliberate is their placement? Awe-inspiring.

Very negative take here: To me it looks like premature optimization, some politicians, mathematicians or engineers wet dream, a design that by today is probably known to be suboptimal, that probably caused millions if not billions of euros of unexpected costs, and tens of thousands of hours of migraine for the people who actually have to run and maintain the thing

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#97

Post by RealityVoid »

m0zg wrote: post #88
Retric wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is ~zero expectation in the scientific community that fusion is going to be cheap at scale. It might eventually be cheaper than fission due to several factors. But, even that’s looking a long way off.

How so? Unlimited, non-radioactive fuel and inherent safety of the system alone could tip this scale pretty severely in favor of fusion once it becomes energy-positive. And remember, once that happens, investment is going to be through the roof, which will accelerate progress. Either the "scientific community" (whatever that means) is either too pessimistic about this, or you've just made this up.

My best guess is the latest "nuclear energy is failing because it's expensive" trend on HN is to blame for this outlook. My take is that it's all poppycock. The ability to make our own little sun is, IMO, transformational for humanity.

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#98

Post by RealityVoid »

jvm_ wrote: post #94
m0zg wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? Unlimited, non-radioactive fuel and inherent safety of the system alone could tip this scale pretty severely in favor of fusion once it becomes energy-positive. And remember, once that happens, investment is going to be through the roof, which will accelerate progress. Either the "scientific community" (whatever that means) is either too pessimistic about this, or you've just made this up.

It was my understanding that fission and fusion both use the same Nuclear Power Plant sized facility. Fusion just replaces the radioactive bit, you still need steam/electricity conversion/transmission/cooling... it's not like a suitcase you can plug wires into, you still need a massive 'factory' to make electricity, just the one bit is a safer.

I am really not buying the fact that nuclear is expensive because it's nuclear. I think the fears around it, the overregulation and opposition to it make it costly. Obviously, there have been plenty of plants that were profitable.

Also, nuclear fusion is possibly the cleanest energy source we could get. If we touch this, we might have a real path forward.

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#99

Post by shellfishgene »

nielsbot wrote: post #68

My current favorite future fusion reactor project (I'm a layperson) is the Wendelstein 7-X: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X Seems like they're meeting all their planned milestones and it's going well! Excited for their next updates... More from their project page: https://www.ipp.mpg.de/w7x "Wendelstein 7-X is the world’s largest fusion device of the stellarator type."

For the German speakers, this podcast is a few years old but super interesting interview with scientist working on it: https://alternativlos.org/36/

Re: Compact nuclear fusion reactor is 'very likely to work,' studies suggest

#100

Post by Fordec »

7373737373 wrote: post #96
Tade0 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me it looks like alien technology. Such an organic shape. So many valves an openings. What is their purpose? How deliberate is their placement? Awe-inspiring.

Very negative take here: To me it looks like premature optimization, some politicians, mathematicians or engineers wet dream, a design that by today is probably known to be suboptimal, that probably caused millions if not billions of euros of unexpected costs, and tens of thousands of hours of migraine for the people who actually have to run and maintain the thing

Literally the primary goal is optimising the technology enough to get more energy out than energy in. Without that singular goal achieved the field has no purpose at all. It's not like theres already workable systems and they're just focusing on pushing the levels a step further just because.
Post reply on HN