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

Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 827 posts

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#121

Post by ianai »

Arrath wrote: post #92
ianai wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geothermal is very location sensitive and requires huge outlays upfront. Maybe it’d be a clearer choice if energy storage were better solved. It also requires political support to cross NIMBYism.

Aren't we at the point where most large scale infrastructure projects require huge outlays? Unless geothermal is an order of magnitude more expensive per MW or GWH than say nuclear, is it a point against it?

I think people both aren’t making the logical connection for why they need more power for their current way of life. Also, the NIMBYism against geothermal may be even stronger than that against nuclear because of the governments involved.

Consider how much commerce is done in the US via truck. Those trucks average 6 miles per gallon diesel. That represents a huge amount of energy. But it currently relies on fossil fuels so people don’t think of it as being potentially served by renewable energy sources.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#122

Post by skrebbel »

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #108
tankenmate wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EUROfusion is a consortium of national fusion research institutes located in the European Union, Switzerland and Ukraine. It was established in 2014 to succeed the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA) as the umbrella organisation of Europe's fusion research laboratories. The consortium is currently funded by the Euratom Horizon 2020 programme. [0] -- Wikipedia So the reason it is called European is that it wa…

I think the point that your parent commenter was making is that Oxford is in the UK and the UK is no longer a member of the EU or Euratom, although it has various agreements with both.

The UK didn't float away or anything. It's still in Europe.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#123

Post by legutierr »

formvoltron wrote: post #105

OK so with fusion everybody loves it because the fuel would be clean and nearly endless. Isn't that what solar power offers? Nobody wants to deploy solar due to high upfront cost. However, wouldn't the startup on a fusion reactor be much greater?

A fusion reactor can conceivably provide a continuous, uninterrupted stream of energy, and from any location, while solar (and wind) energy can only be harvested intermittently, from certain specific locations.

The main issues with renewable energy sources today are electricity storage and transmission. If it weren't for these limitations, wind and solar would already be superior to other means of energy production.

Most likely problems with storage and transmission will be solved first, before fusion energy is proven to be commercially viable. However, there is no guarantee that they will be—especially in the case of transmission, which is primarily a political problem.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#124

Post by knapcio »

formvoltron wrote: post #105

OK so with fusion everybody loves it because the fuel would be clean and nearly endless. Isn't that what solar power offers? Nobody wants to deploy solar due to high upfront cost. However, wouldn't the startup on a fusion reactor be much greater?

I remember that early this autumn Sweden had to borrow energy from other countries because it relied too much on renewables which turned out to be unstable.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#125

Post by elric »

gtirloni wrote: post #113
formvoltron wrote: post #105

OK so with fusion everybody loves it because the fuel would be clean and nearly endless. Isn't that what solar power offers? Nobody wants to deploy solar due to high upfront cost. However, wouldn't the startup on a fusion reactor be much greater?

Solar panel manufacturing and disposal is far from clean though.

And you think this is going to be any different for fusion plants?

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#126

Post by hdjjhhvvhga »

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #108
tankenmate wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EUROfusion is a consortium of national fusion research institutes located in the European Union, Switzerland and Ukraine. It was established in 2014 to succeed the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA) as the umbrella organisation of Europe's fusion research laboratories. The consortium is currently funded by the Euratom Horizon 2020 programme. [0] -- Wikipedia So the reason it is called European is that it wa…

I think the point that your parent commenter was making is that Oxford is in the UK and the UK is no longer a member of the EU or Euratom, although it has various agreements with both.

Well, any EU country can opt out of the EU, but they cannot leave Europe - unless you redefine basic geographical concepts.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#127

Post by andyjohnson0 »

skrebbel wrote: post #122
andyjohnson0 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point that your parent commenter was making is that Oxford is in the UK and the UK is no longer a member of the EU or Euratom, although it has various agreements with both.

The UK didn't float away or anything. It's still in Europe.

Geographically, yes. Politically, much less so - unfortunately.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#128

Post by vcdimension »

okuntilnow wrote: post #114
formvoltron wrote: post #105

OK so with fusion everybody loves it because the fuel would be clean and nearly endless. Isn't that what solar power offers? Nobody wants to deploy solar due to high upfront cost. However, wouldn't the startup on a fusion reactor be much greater?

Solar takes up quite a lot of space, but most importantly only works for a portion of a 24 hour cycle.

The Chinese & Japanese governments are investing in space based solar which solves the nighttime problem: https://wonderfulengineering.com/china-is-aiming-to-build-a-... https://nextrendsasia.org/japan-pioneer-of-transferring-sola...

But we really need more energy storage, and there are plenty of good ideas in this area too: better batteries, gravity bases systems, crowd sourced storage, etc.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#129

Post by mannykannot »

GavinMcG wrote: post #96
mannykannot wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess you could argue that you wouldn't evaporate all water in the kettle... One does not have to argue for that interpretation - raising the temperature to boiling point, not boiling it dry, is indisputably the accepted and intended meaning of the phrase wherever English is spoken... though it would fit with a certain stereotype of scientists if a bunch of plasma physicists did not know how to make a pot of tea!

It's entirely disputable as evidenced by this conversation. It's also an incredible waste of time to argue over definitions. They're always disputable because they always arise in response to two people using a word differently. Maybe they're wrong and you're right, or maybe others also use the word that way—it doesn't matter. Humility and aiming at mutual understanding is far more worthwhile.

This issue is indeed trivial, but I don't know how, in general, we are going to achieve mutual understanding without establishing an agreed-upon semantics.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#130

Post by dangom »

IceHegel wrote: post #120

Not to be an asshole, but I think the fusion crowd could go for more of an under promise, over deliver mentality.

No one will get funded with that mentality in such a high-risk high-reward area like fusion. But indeed after so many headlines I agree with you that no one gets excited about these news anymore.
Post reply on HN