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

Launch HN: Maritime Fusion (YC W25) – Fusion Reactors for Ships

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 267 posts

Re: Launch HN: Maritime Fusion (YC W25) – Fusion Reactors for Ships

#171

Post by creer »

jandrese wrote: post #151
marssaxman wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> before we start trying to build them into moving vessels Why wait, though? I agree that the timeline - the whole project! - seems extraordinarily optimistic, but I don't see why development of potential maritime applications should create any obstacle to the simultaneous development of grid power applications.

Lots of potential complications when building something on a vessel and failure is more likely to be deadly, if for example it fails because the ship is being battered too much by a storm. Plus there is the complicating factors with needing to miniaturize the equipment enough to fit in the available space.

To be fair, a small fusion reactor actually producing power day in, day out - would be a ridiculously huge success. Before worrying about reliability in a storm or miniaturizing (to the point of that being irrelevant). There will THEN be this challenge of reliability and size but achieving the first step would release a sea of additional funding.

Re: Launch HN: Maritime Fusion (YC W25) – Fusion Reactors for Ships

#172

Post by Terr_ »

jaronchong wrote: post #58

I'm just going to put this here. Someone please make this a reality. ### *"Tokamak Sailor"* (To the tune of "Drunken Sailor") *(Verse 1)* What shall we do with a tokamak sailor? What shall we do with a tokamak sailor? What shall we do with a tokamak sailor? Early in the mornin'! *(Chorus)* *Ho, ho! Fire up the plasma!* *Ho, ho! Fire up the plasma!* *Ho, ho! Fire up the plasma!* *Fusion in the mornin'!* *(Verse 2)* Ra…

    Im·a·gine a ship that puts to sea
    It pow·ers it·self with elec·tri·ci·ty    
    The a·toms knit more than they split
    Oh glow, my fu·sion core, glow (hooh!)

    Soon may the break·through flare
    To make our prod·uct not va·por·ware
    One day, when the bas·ics are done
    We'll make our IPO

Re: Launch HN: Maritime Fusion (YC W25) – Fusion Reactors for Ships

#173

Post by throwawaymaths »

simpaticoder wrote: post #69
jimbru wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first ocean-going steamships still had sails - it took many years for steam power to fully displace sail. Presumably a new maritime power system, like fusion, would follow a similar pattern. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steamboat#Sea-_and_Ocean-going

There is something very compelling about a fusion-powered ship also having sails.

sails on modern cargo ships is a thing (see pyxis ocean)

Re: Launch HN: Maritime Fusion (YC W25) – Fusion Reactors for Ships

#175

Post by sien »

Balgair wrote: post #132
jtcohen wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes

Could you explain why its a yes?

At a guess.

Fusion is being regulated like particle accelerators, not like fission reactors.

The Fusion Industry Association has more information on this.

https://www.fusionindustryassociation.org/policy/fusion-regu...

Any port that lets in a LNG ship or similar is likely to allow the much lower risk of a fusion ship coming in.

Re: Launch HN: Maritime Fusion (YC W25) – Fusion Reactors for Ships

#177

Post by nradov »

nocoiner wrote: post #164
FiatLuxDave wrote: post #139

Greybeard former fusion founder here. Wishing you guys all the luck in the world! Email in profile in case you wish to chat. For all the naysayers, as a fusion startup, targeting the marine market is a good move. They aren't even the first fusion startup to do so; IIRC Rostoker's group got their first major funding from the NRL. The marine market pays a premium for not having to refuel, and historically emerging ener…

Can you elaborate on the use of photovoltaics in shipping? After a few searches, I haven’t been able to find anything that suggests the marine industry was an important sector for its development. Also, I feel extremely confident predicting that the commercial maritime industry will never ever pay a premium for a particular fuel source. There may eventually be some applications where fusion is most efficient, but fus…

Sailboat owners were early adopters of photovoltaics in order to avoid having to run generators. Some newer merchant ships have installed photovoltaics to supply part of the hotel load and maybe save a tiny amount of fuel, but that's a newer development and probably more of a "greenwashing" thing.

Re: Launch HN: Maritime Fusion (YC W25) – Fusion Reactors for Ships

#178

Post by rgmerk »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #161
phtrivier wrote: post #40

> and we believe we’ll witness Q > 1 within a few (say 3) years. That’s huge. I think it fits squarely in the "requires extraordinary evidence" bucket - what makes you so bold ? Also, what's you intermediate plans between : 2025 -> Post on HN 2028 -> Q>1 achieved (by you ? by someone else ?) ???? -> ???? 20xx -> a ship goes to sea powered by a fusion reactor ???? -> ???? 2060 -> fusion is so easy, let's use it for ba…

Batteries are steadily improving, at least in the cost factor. We haven't seen any 2x leaps in density from sulfur or solid state or aluminum air. But LFP and Sodium Ion are making undeniable progress in cheap usable EV batteries that don't require nickel or cobalt.

I'm not sure I'm seeing the relevance here. Incremental advances in battery tech (or even futuristic step-change prospects like lithium-air batteries) won't solve intercontinental shipping.

Re: Launch HN: Maritime Fusion (YC W25) – Fusion Reactors for Ships

#179

Post by trhway »

why not inertial confinement? Z-machine at Sandia has been already for 20 years generating fusion conditions. Livermore NIF got that "break-even" in the recent years, and with solid-state lasers the efficiency would at least order of magnitude better than the old lasers the NIF was using. And the only real Q>>1 fusion we've got working so far - H-bombs - is inertial confinement. So, in some sense inertial confinement is "just" an engineering problem of efficiently "taming"/reproducing at smaller scale the H-bomb with lasers or Z-pinch (or both at the same time, plus the magnetic compression that NIF added to the lasers to get that "break-even") whereis, as far as i see, any Tokamak (or any other magnetic confinement) is still yet to demonstrate any similar results.
Post reply on HN