Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder how many capture plants and energy would be required to bring it back to a normal level.
Let's run the numbers. I believe Climeworks' Orca is the largest DAC plant right now, and they claim it'll capture 4000 tons/year. We currently emit something like 40 gigatons/yr. (4*10^10)/(4*10^3) = 10^7 DAC plants. So let's say that DAC isn't a silver bullet :-) There are a whole portfolio of other carbon capture and sequestration technologies that'll be needed to get us carbon-negative enough to avoid going over…
Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
31–40 of 87 posts
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#32> The nuclear fusion startup Helion, which announced last week that it has raised $500 million, says it has developed new technologies that may make nuclear fusion viable — practically, economically and environmentally. This is the only actual news in the article. The rest is bog-standard speculation.
"May" is pretty specious. Is there any evidence of something likely to work? I would love to see practical fusion, but I see no reason to believe it will exist soon. Someone has to figure out how to actually make it practical first.
Last decade, major discoveries were made in practical high-temperature superconductors. By 2017, you could commercially purchase superconducting tape that can do >8T, the state of the art has improved since, and keeps improving. All the constraints and limits on fusion that were known since the field began are changing now. Most importantly, with high-field magnets, the size of a theoretically functional net-energy fusion reactor comes way down, to what is achievably by a reasonably well funded startup. The whole field is open now, and all the different magnetic confinement fusion technologies that were tested and discarded over the first 60 years of fusion research are now being re-evaluated in ligth of the new magnets that are available. That's why there are now like a dozen well-funded fusion startups.
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
"May" is pretty specious. Is there any evidence of something likely to work? I would love to see practical fusion, but I see no reason to believe it will exist soon. Someone has to figure out how to actually make it practical first.
In magnetic confinement fusion, power density scales to the fourth power of the magnetic field strength. The only way to reasonably achieve the kind of magnetic fields needed without massive constant power draw is superconducting magnets. For a very long time, the best superconductors available limited the maximum field strength to ~ 5-6T. This limited the space of possible magnetic confinement reactors into basicall…
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
"May" is pretty specious. Is there any evidence of something likely to work? I would love to see practical fusion, but I see no reason to believe it will exist soon. Someone has to figure out how to actually make it practical first.
In magnetic confinement fusion, power density scales to the fourth power of the magnetic field strength. The only way to reasonably achieve the kind of magnetic fields needed without massive constant power draw is superconducting magnets. For a very long time, the best superconductors available limited the maximum field strength to ~ 5-6T. This limited the space of possible magnetic confinement reactors into basicall…
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#35> The nuclear fusion startup Helion, which announced last week that it has raised $500 million, says it has developed new technologies that may make nuclear fusion viable — practically, economically and environmentally. This is the only actual news in the article. The rest is bog-standard speculation.
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
In magnetic confinement fusion, power density scales to the fourth power of the magnetic field strength. The only way to reasonably achieve the kind of magnetic fields needed without massive constant power draw is superconducting magnets. For a very long time, the best superconductors available limited the maximum field strength to ~ 5-6T. This limited the space of possible magnetic confinement reactors into basicall…
Do you mean that ITER could be obsolete before even reaching a production phase ?
That ITER doesn't use superconducting magnets to me means that it will definitely be "obsolete" in the sense of using the most modern technologies, but it's still going to do the job it was designed for.
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you mean that ITER could be obsolete before even reaching a production phase ?
Absolutely, as is the case in any huge project, it takes long enough to build that at some point you have to freeze the design and technology keeps progressing. It's hard to predict which pieces of technology will mature on what timeline, and at some point you just have to start. That ITER doesn't use superconducting magnets to me means that it will definitely be "obsolete" in the sense of using the most modern techn…
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
In magnetic confinement fusion, power density scales to the fourth power of the magnetic field strength. The only way to reasonably achieve the kind of magnetic fields needed without massive constant power draw is superconducting magnets. For a very long time, the best superconductors available limited the maximum field strength to ~ 5-6T. This limited the space of possible magnetic confinement reactors into basicall…
Do you mean that ITER could be obsolete before even reaching a production phase ?
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. The first landmark is to make coal plants unprofitable. Once all (most of) the coal and oil plants are closed, it would be interesting to use the spare electricity for carbon capture. Otherwise you are burning coal to power the carbon capture facility.
I don't know, we might need technology to save us from our seemingly bottomless stupidity. Maybe in 2050, Robo-Joe Manchin will secure a permanent government slush fund for Greater West Virginia coal mining and we'll have to stick a fusion-powered CO2 capture facility right next to where they burn it.
Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
In magnetic confinement fusion, power density scales to the fourth power of the magnetic field strength. The only way to reasonably achieve the kind of magnetic fields needed without massive constant power draw is superconducting magnets. For a very long time, the best superconductors available limited the maximum field strength to ~ 5-6T. This limited the space of possible magnetic confinement reactors into basicall…
Do you mean that ITER could be obsolete before even reaching a production phase ?
No, in that its principle purpose is fusion and plasma research. It'll still be able to do science.