Live data from Hacker News

Will we ever get fusion power?

construction-physics.com

271–280 of 309 posts

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#271
post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solar and wind energy are impossible without stable energy sources like coal or fission. Solar and wind energy are highly volatile, and battery energy storage is far too expensive.

You already said that, and you're ignoring the fact that many countries are switching from coal and nuclear to renewables, thanks in part to the rapidly falling prices.

just today, the UK had its last coal delivery to a power plant. after that, it's closing and the UK will no longer be using coal at all.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckkg0wl7dkro

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#272
post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You already said that, and you're ignoring the fact that many countries are switching from coal and nuclear to renewables, thanks in part to the rapidly falling prices.

just today, the UK had its last coal delivery to a power plant. after that, it's closing and the UK will no longer be using coal at all. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckkg0wl7dkro

This is irrelevant to what we were discussing originally. Neither the UK nor any other country does have battery storage of the size of major power plants. Those are required to provide stable energy. Otherwise the power would go out during calm or in the night.

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#273
post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither semiconductors nor plastics shift the energy generation paradigm. "Advanced materials"- alright, well, which ones? And do they give us a better return than good old steam? Wind, solar and batteries are products of combustion-fueled industry. The extent to which we have electrified the world industrial base is minimal, and to do so at the current scale on the basis of wind and solar would take a larger quantit…

You really believe it would have been possible to construct a modern wind turbine with the materials available in 1950? Yes they do give a much better return than any thermal source according to any recent study of LCOE I've come across. Reflected in investment numbers - renewables account for 70% of new global capacity added last year. Wind, solar and batteries are products of an energy intensive process NOT a combu…

> You really believe it would have been possible to construct a modern wind turbine with the materials available in 1950?

Sure, modern materials make for a more modern wind turbine. But they don't shift the paradigm. Nothing has since fission, right?

> Wind, solar and batteries are products of an energy intensive process NOT a combustion based process.

The fact remains that energy intensive industry is currently accomplished mainly via combustion. The degree of electrification is small and an effort to fully electrify faces what appear to be prohibitive resource limitations. If you have any ideas on this point I would be interested to hear them.

Electrification is happening in personal transport. We have made minimal progress towards an electric shipping fleet, electric air travel, electric trucking, etc. And if we do begin to make serious progress, it will come with serious environmental (and likely political) costs.

Oak Ridge was a testbed. The Chinese have an MSR that has been selling power to the grid for several years. Copenhagen Atomics is building them to fit into shipping containers. Is this not enough to prove the technology viable? The main reason traditional fission became dominant, as I understand, is that it allowed nuclear-capable nations to conceal nuclear weapons programs with energy programs. And once the supply chain and institutional expertise gets some inertia, it is hard to change tracks.

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#274
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Schockley-Quiesser limit

That's certainly a hard limit for a cell with a single P-N junction. However, with a bit of ingenuity, we can do much better than that; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley%E2%80%93Queisser_limi...

Sure there are many novel solar technologies that subvert the SQ assumptions thereby avoiding the conclusion. However, the author of the parent post believes that existing technology today is sufficient.

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#275
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Schockley-Quiesser limit

Only applies to single-junction cells. 68%-efficient solar panels are quite theoretically possible, they'll just be incredibly difficult to manufacture cheaply. The current world record for solar panel efficiency is 47.6%.

I agree, however the author is convinced about current popular solar panel technology.

Indeed even theoretically we can do 86% multi and 99% with quantum dots——in the current state of technology these remain science fiction considering the commercial manufacturing processes available.

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#276
post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really believe it would have been possible to construct a modern wind turbine with the materials available in 1950? Yes they do give a much better return than any thermal source according to any recent study of LCOE I've come across. Reflected in investment numbers - renewables account for 70% of new global capacity added last year. Wind, solar and batteries are products of an energy intensive process NOT a combu…

> You really believe it would have been possible to construct a modern wind turbine with the materials available in 1950? Sure, modern materials make for a more modern wind turbine. But they don't shift the paradigm. Nothing has since fission, right? > Wind, solar and batteries are products of an energy intensive process NOT a combustion based process. The fact remains that energy intensive industry is currently acco…

Modern wind turbines absolutely have shifted the paradigm - both in size, efficiency and durability. Across the globe, demand for new turbines in the market is insatiable. No other electricity generation technology (even nuclear in its heyday back in the 1980s) has grown as fast as wind has in the last 15 years - although I expect it's soon to be overtaken by PV growth. It's likely that this year the amount of electricity consumed globally from wind turbines (around 2.5TWh) will match that of nuclear reactors despite nuclear's 60 year head start in grid scale operations.

But the most obvious difference, and that which contributes most to the paradigm shift, is the difference in price.

The existence of technology alone isn't enough to shift any paradigm - the tech has to be relatively cheap - transistors were a curiosity until they became cheap and then they shifted the paradigm, same thing happened with integrated circuits and nearly every technology breakthrough in history.

Batteries, PV and wind turbines are mass-produced and their prices are falling as you'd expect given the expansion in production (between 80% and 95% in the last 15 years). This has been the way since Henry Ford and is not going to change. What is also inevitable is that once mass-production is introduced into any human endeavour, then the existing technology is doomed.

The TMSR-LF1 in China has not being selling into the grid for several years. It was never envisaged to do so - it's absolutely tiny (only 2MW) and it's intended that it will operate intermittently for the first 5 or more years before they try running it continuously. This is a science experiment, not a viable commercial reactor. The 2nd Oak Ridge reactor back in the 1960s was 7 or 8 times bigger - although it never managed to run properly and only ever achieved 7MW of output.

I really don't understand why thorium liquid salt reactor enthusiasm is widespread. It's just one of endless reactor designs which failed to make it into commercial operation because of a host of genuine technical/engineering reasons. Just read the wikipedia page[1] - the list of disadvantages is longer than the list of advantages. For every problem it solves, it introduces several more.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-salt_reactor

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

just today, the UK had its last coal delivery to a power plant. after that, it's closing and the UK will no longer be using coal at all. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckkg0wl7dkro

This is irrelevant to what we were discussing originally. Neither the UK nor any other country does have battery storage of the size of major power plants. Those are required to provide stable energy. Otherwise the power would go out during calm or in the night.

As I've shown, many countries are making the change.

It will take some time, you can't build this level of infrastructure overnight.

Here's another from today: https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/contact-energy-picks-tesla-...

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#278
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Base load" doesn't really enter into it: you just need storage to make renewables make sense by supplying when generation doesn't meet demand and recharging when demand is less than supply. (or, if you have a cheap "base load" you use storage to even out the peaks and troughs in the same way). Base load is just a somewhat arbitrary line drawn across the lowest point of demand, it's not an actual requirement of the g…

There will be times when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine. Storage can come to the rescue if this is a few hours, but over much longer time periods will be a problem. It's rare, but not unheard of. Gas will be part of the solution for many years to come.

Yes. On the super long term - wind doesn't blow, sun doesn't shine, oil doesn't flow, coal doesn't mine. Then the feasibility of nucular is a no brainer. That's all that's left besides renewables, nucular fishin. And when we run of of nucular fishin, and that day will come too... Fusion will be all that's left of the non-renewables. And it will be used surely, provided it's a net-positive delta energy.

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#279
post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is irrelevant to what we were discussing originally. Neither the UK nor any other country does have battery storage of the size of major power plants. Those are required to provide stable energy. Otherwise the power would go out during calm or in the night.

As I've shown, many countries are making the change. It will take some time, you can't build this level of infrastructure overnight. Here's another from today: https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/contact-energy-picks-tesla-...

You haven't shown that "many countries" are building large-scale battery grid storage.

Re: Will we ever get fusion power?

#280
post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I've shown, many countries are making the change. It will take some time, you can't build this level of infrastructure overnight. Here's another from today: https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/contact-energy-picks-tesla-...

You haven't shown that "many countries" are building large-scale battery grid storage.

Last quarter Tesla deployed 4GWh of battery capacity, this quarter it is 9.4GWh.

Where do you think that is being deployed?

Post reply on HN