Live data from Hacker News

Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

aviationweek.com

281–290 of 375 posts

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aditional weird: this is the second round of publicity they've had on this project, for what looks like no progress. Why publicise? Why now?

Push the oil and natural gas markets lower, pile on all the other factors pushing them down right now, and further harm Russia's economy. I'm half joking, but I'd keep an eye out for more unusual energy related press releases, to see if that'll confirm that it's a media blitz aimed at the oil market etc.

I asked a friend at LM and they say it's probably because someone wanted to file a patent.

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's hardly ever true. Even pg discussed the phenomenon, as you undoubtedly know. There's a good idea, or a news article hailing progress, or some other kind of optimism, then the first comment is a mid-brow dismissal. They are the lowest-effort comments to make; "that won't work because X isn't well-respected and Y often happens to similar teams" requires almost no research and cannot really be refuted. The only…

The only solution is one that can't be applied here: LockMart shouldn't make extraordinary claims ("Check out this cool fusion reactor!") until they have extraordinary proof to go with them. Right now, this entire story is just a waste of space on a hard drive somewhere in Palo Alto, and no comments pro or con are going to change that.

I don't know about that. What you are suggesting doesn't really fit the MO of Skunkworks where they work on advanced projects for years before revealing them. It's not like they announced stealth aircraft in the 90s just to drive up their stock price, they'd been working on it for nearly 4o years by that point and the planes were flying missions for decades.

Also someone on reddit made an interesting observation about job openings at Lockheed: http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/2jbgcf/lockheed_...

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#283

This appears to be further development of the novel nuclear reactor approach described by Charles Chase at Solve in 2013 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAsRFVbcyUY . The video provides a basic overview of fusion reactor designs and their breakthrough.

Yeah, and when they first announced it, they were predicting a working reactor in four years ("by 2017"): http://www.dvice.com/2013-2-22/lockheeds-skunk-works-promise...

A year and a half later, they're apparently no closer to that goal.

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#284
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maintenance costs alone would be astronomically lucrative.

But solving fusion will cut into Lockheed's mainline oil wars revenue stream.

You can't stop progress just because it alters your cash flow. If you don't make the product, someone else will, and end up positioned to take the future cash flows. No (rational) company stops investing in new products just because it challenges their current offerings.

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#285
post #232

On a tangent, is there any fundamental reason that reactors are always built to drive turbines rather thermocouples - do they simply not scale up to the amount of heat a typical reactor puts out, or what?

Steam turbine plus a conventional generator is vastly more efficient than thermocouples - 30-40% for steam versus I suspect they are also much, much cheaper when you are talking about powers in the hundreds-of-megawatts range. I don't have specific data at hand to back that though. I never heard of any grid-level power generation being done with thermocouples.

That is in line with general impression. I just find it really weird that after all the high-tech nuclear stuff is working the next stage is an old-fashioned water boiler like on a steam engine of hundreds of years ago. (Well, obviously these turbines are not old-fashioned or simple boilers, but you know what I mean.) It just baffles me that we don't have a way of efficiently generating electrical current directly from particle radiation, eg through pressure fluctuations in a magnetic field, instead of through heat transfer.

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#286
post #262
post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

piston powered airplanes run at full or nearly full power for extended periods.

My point may not have been as strong as I thought, but that tends to support it - airplane and boat engines do need to operate at max power nonstop, so they're designed for it. Consumer automobiles usually just accelerate for a few seconds and cruise at relatively modest speed, and I'm pretty sure their cooling and other related systems are designed around that.

That's because you usually have a speed limit. If you have a car with say about 100 hp your top speed will be about 200 km/h and that is a speed you can drive at for extended period on an Autobahn in low traffic. A more powerful car will of course make it harder to keep the pedal at the metal.

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's hardly ever true. In my experience, Hacker News is full of people from the software field; folks whose professions are often unconstrained by physics,[1] and who have a generally optimistic "this can happen" mentality. That's why everyone here believes we'll have fully self-driving cars in 5-6 years. In the rest of the engineering world, the answer to any question is: it'll be harder than you think it'll be (p…

> Did you know that coal plants, which still make up the majority of U.S. energy production, are only about twice as efficient today than they were a century ago? Did you know that wind and solar are already at grid parity in over half the world? And that in many large first-world countries (Germany, Australia) the price of energy goes negative during daylight hours because of the amount of energy produced by renewab…

To be clear, the price of energy goes negative because of government subsidies. For example, a wind plant with a $30/MWH subsidy can afford to run at a price of -$30.

Similarly, if you're in California and you ever wondered why your electricity bill is 2x that of any other state, it is because you are the ones footing the bill for those subsidies. Without subsidies, wind and solar are far more inefficient at a $/MWH basis.

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helion here. There are pretty big differences. They did get the high Beta and compact/modular parts right. The primary differences are that Helion operates entirely pulsed with simple non-superconducting magnets. That allows us to go to higher temperatures, cleaner fuels, directly recovery energy, and if everything works as planned should eliminate the wall concerns and need for particle beams. I do think what they a…

If you really are Dr. Kirtley let me say you have one of the most, if not the most important job in earth right now. Fusion energy has the potential to stop wars and re-start the space revolution. I wish you the best.

I'm all about the space revolution, but the only way to stop wars is to have one so big there is no one left to wage them. In a way, fusion does have that potential, but I suspect you were going for something more positive.

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did you know that coal plants, which still make up the majority of U.S. energy production, are only about twice as efficient today than they were a century ago? Did you know that wind and solar are already at grid parity in over half the world? And that in many large first-world countries (Germany, Australia) the price of energy goes negative during daylight hours because of the amount of energy produced by renewab…

To be clear, the price of energy goes negative because of government subsidies. For example, a wind plant with a $30/MWH subsidy can afford to run at a price of -$30. Similarly, if you're in California and you ever wondered why your electricity bill is 2x that of any other state, it is because you are the ones footing the bill for those subsidies. Without subsidies, wind and solar are far more inefficient at a $/MWH…

Being able to externalize pollution is a subsidy. Accounting for externalized costs, coal is about parity with wind in terms of cost, though gas is ahead of both.

Re: Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did you know that coal plants, which still make up the majority of U.S. energy production, are only about twice as efficient today than they were a century ago? Did you know that wind and solar are already at grid parity in over half the world? And that in many large first-world countries (Germany, Australia) the price of energy goes negative during daylight hours because of the amount of energy produced by renewab…

To be clear, the price of energy goes negative because of government subsidies. For example, a wind plant with a $30/MWH subsidy can afford to run at a price of -$30. Similarly, if you're in California and you ever wondered why your electricity bill is 2x that of any other state, it is because you are the ones footing the bill for those subsidies. Without subsidies, wind and solar are far more inefficient at a $/MWH…

Oil, coal, and gas is subsidized to the tune of ~$400 billion a year (2010 numbers), while renewables are around ~$60 billion a year. Renewables have a capital cost, but no fuel cost.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-10-21/when-it-come...

"Meanwhile, a recent report from the U.N. Industrial Development Organization notes that photovoltaic module prices have been falling at a rate of 15 percent to 24 percent a year for some time. In 2011, factory gate prices for crystalline-silicon photovoltaic modules fell below the $1-per-watt mark, often regarded as the point of “grid parity” for solar power. Earlier this year, they reached 85¢.

The “levelized cost of electricity” for solar, a measure of the average price of power over the lifetime of a power project, has fallen from 32¢ per kilowatt hour in 2009 to 17¢ in early 2012. These declining costs are a major factor behind an explosion in use. A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council calculates that from 2006 to 2011, wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, and wave electricity production increased from 1 percent to 2.7 percent of total US production, from 0.1 percent to 1.5 percent in China, and from 5.3 percent to 10.7 percent in Germany. One sunny Saturday in May 2012 saw Germany produce nearly half of its electricity from solar. Given the long life of power plants—often measured in decades—this rate of change is phenomenal. Again, five years ago, total global photovoltaic capacity was just 16 gigawatts. In 2011, the world added nearly twice that—29 gigawatts—of new capacity."

Note this article is from October 2012, two years ago. Renewable installations have skyrocketed, with subsidies far below what oil, gas, and other fossil fuels are provided with.

Post reply on HN