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

Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 201 posts

Re: Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

#141

Post by jhartmann »

scythe wrote: post #63
sbierwagen wrote: post #54

Safe: With no possibility of melt-down, or hazardous nuclear waste, fusion dose not suffer the drawbacks that make fission an unattractive alternative. Eyeroll. D-He3 fusion produces less neutron flux than D-T, but it's hardly aneutronic-- otherwise they couldn't breed He3 from it. After a decade, the whole reactor will be nuclear waste. I wonder what the service interval on an installed reactor will be? Or are they…

>D-He3 fusion produces less neutron flux than D-T, but it's hardly aneutronic-- otherwise they couldn't breed 3He from it. You can't "breed" 3He; you have to breed tritium, which decays to He3 with a half-life of 12 years. D-3He reactors do produce some neutrons, roughly 1% of the flux of D-T, and almost entirely from D-D side-reactions. Actually, a big problem with D-3He as of today is the lack of neutrons -- since…

Actually the D + D reaction has two equally probable branches (and one very improbable one that makes an alpha particle and a gamma ray, which is mostly ignored), one makes Tritium and a Proton and the other makes D + He3. So the D + D reaction will breed He3 fuel, along with Tritium. The resulting proton from the Tritium branch can also combine with Deuterium and create Helium 3 as well in the right conditions. Under carefully control, the right conditions, and with some engineering work I would wager you could bias the reactions and side reactions towards creating more Helium 3.

Re: Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

#142

Post by tjradcliffe »

marvin wrote: post #138
rosser wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

War, itself, is a pretty damned sophomoric thing.

This is a simplification. Defending yourself against unprovoked attack is not juvenile, although there are moral systems that advocate rolling over and giving up if you are attacked. And there is a whole spectrum of combat actions where "defense against unprovoked attack" is one extreme. In industrialized countries, wars of aggression are usually never profitable, but the same can unfortunately not be said for less-d…

Actually, wars of aggression are almost never profitable. Accumulating riches via conquest is almost always a myth, because armies a) destroy much that is of value and b) are unbelievably expensive.

"Wealth through superior firepower" has hardly ever been achieved. Even Rome mostly got rich through trade after its armies conquered Europe and North Africa, and a lawful peace was imposed. Had everyone been economically rational pretty much the same end could have been achieved through trade (spoiler: not everyone is economically rational.)

Simple looting of the kind the Spanish engaged in in the New World was never a very good path to wealth, partly because its first effect was to create massive inflation (if you use gold as money and inject vase amounts of gold into your economy without increased productive capacity, you get inflation, not wealth.)

So the conditions of gaining wealth by war are very, very narrowly defined. It's not impossible, but it's amazingly difficult.

There are defensible moral reasons for engaging in mass organized violence--I support the current American efforts to kill people in Northern Iraq, for example--but economic rationality (profitability) is never one of them, because the first step to creating wealth is never to engage in the wholesale destruction of everything the creation of wealth depends on.

Re: Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

#143

Post by r00fus »

ForHackernews wrote: post #72
cwal37 wrote: post #19

Nature had a fun article a few weeks back on the current trickle of VC into fusion startups. http://www.nature.com/news/plasma-physics-the-fusion-upstart... It's certainly interesting, and I wish these companies all the best. The consternation I see occasionally over a company like this getting a (relatively) small amount of funding confuses me. There are so many software startups that receive equivalent or greater f…

> or even Uber Talk about an understatement. Uber is just a cheaper cab. Commercially viable fusion is a game-changer on a planetary scale: Halting global warming by replacing fossil fuels, hydrogen fuel cells become viable by generating hydrogen through hydrolysis, energy-intensive desalinization plants deliver fresh water for drinking and irrigation.

Planetary? Try Intrasolar. Don't forget the goal of diversifying the human race beyond Earth. Fission power is currently infeasible due to the shielding problem.

Re: Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

#144

Post by nyan_sandwich »

rdl wrote: post #23

It's interesting that you can justify this investment in at least four separate ways, independently: 1) Even if there is a low chance of success, it would be wildly profitable if successful, and investing early gets you a good share if it's successful. 2) Fusion power would make the world a better place; investing in this way, when you already have huge returns and it's someone else's money, is actually rational even…

I would also add that YC investment boosts nuclear stuff as a legitimate thing. Could lead to copycat investment (which we dearly need in the nuclear field).

Re: Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

#145

Post by [deleted] »

kghose wrote: post #140
rsync wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I mean, defense contracting is a bit of a drag and there's tons of red tape" Not to mention the tremendous moral hazard. I am unclear as to how anyone can function as a reasonable moral actor when they profit from war. Calling it "defense" does not solve that problem.

Plasma cannons don't kill people, people kill people, and we've already invented those.

[deleted]

Re: Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

#147

Post by _delirium »

lukasm wrote: post #14
pinaceae wrote: post #8

is this the equivalent of throwing shit at the wall and see what sticks? why do vcs with a specialty in software suddenly stray into completely unknown territory? nothing left to fund in software? rarely does this end well.

Expected value.

I would guess either personal interest or PR, rather than a solid return calculation. YC doesn't want to be seen as the "web startup incubator", even if that's where they can best maximize ROI. And besides PR, the principals likely don't want to be that, either, but have loftier goals. Which is perfectly fine; maximizing investor returns is rarely a good way to do anything important or interesting.

Re: Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

#149

Post by alex_anglin »

swalsh wrote: post #95
TillE wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've already weaponized nuclear fusion into the most destructive bomb ever created. It probably couldn't get a whole lot worse than that. I think there are other paths to sustainable energy, but certainly viable fusion power is the holy grail.

Nuclear bombs aren't that dangerous though... in the grand scheme of things. That's because their use could trigger a chain reaction which creates a virtual apocalypse scenario. Basically ensuring their use impossible. What's scary is a weapon that can cause massive damage, that we are actually willing to use.

With respect to nuclear weapons, the question isn't just with their use but also their misuse. There have been a non-zero amount of incidents in North America with non-nuclear detonations (fortunately).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accid...

Re: Y Combinator And Mithril Invest In Helion, A Nuclear Fusion Startup

#150

Post by ctdonath »

soperj wrote: post #78
malandrew wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why this was downvoted. I'm not going to discount the possibility to invent something worse then our most powerful fusion bomb, but if we talk probability here, developing processes that allow greater control is likely to result in a worst case scenario where we have a weapon that is at most as powerful as what we already have, but more focused. IMHO focused fusion destruction is likely to be far m…

I'll never understand being able to kill someone in a humane way(through acts of war). You're killing someone.

Sometimes situation dictates that someone is going to die, and you have the option of deciding who and how - best it happen to the "most deserving" in the least painful/agonizing way possible.
Post reply on HN