What is "zero-carbon" in this context? No graphite control rods?
I think it's there for people who may not be familiar with what fusion energy is, so they can understand that it's a potential climate change solution.
Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
41–50 of 833 posts
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#42What is "zero-carbon" in this context? No graphite control rods?
There are no control rods in fusion reactors.
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#43What is "zero-carbon" in this context? No graphite control rods?
It means no fossil fuels required to sustain the reaction, and no carbon emissions resulting from it.
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#44While I appreciate all the effort in nuclear fusion and do think we should continue to invest a little of each years global R&D budget, it seems these reactors (e.g ITER and this one) still require tritium which is rather hard to come by efficiently. Which means normal nuclear reactors will be needed to make it and minimising any economic viability of the dependent fusion rector for a long long time.
> tritium which is rather hard to come by efficiently
I'm not by any means well informed on the matter, but isn't the lunar surface covered in tritium deposits?
It might make sense to mine the moon sooner than later. Once we have the necessary equipment and resources there, the delta-v for getting the mined product to Earth isn't nearly as substantial.
Building lunar mining tech is likely to unlock all sorts of advances for the human race.
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#45While I appreciate all the effort in nuclear fusion and do think we should continue to invest a little of each years global R&D budget, it seems these reactors (e.g ITER and this one) still require tritium which is rather hard to come by efficiently. Which means normal nuclear reactors will be needed to make it and minimising any economic viability of the dependent fusion rector for a long long time.
> tritium which is rather hard to come by efficiently I'm not by any means well informed on the matter, but isn't the lunar surface covered in tritium deposits? It might make sense to mine the moon sooner than later. Once we have the necessary equipment and resources there, the delta-v for getting the mined product to Earth isn't nearly as substantial. Building lunar mining tech is likely to unlock all sorts of advan…
You're mixing up tritium (hydrogen-3) and helium-3.
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#46This is very promising. Hopefully this can be one of the primary tools used to remove our dependency on dirty fuel sources
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#47What is "zero-carbon" in this context? No graphite control rods?
A fusion rector does not have control rods. It has a magnetic containment field around a plasma which is, something like 10x hotter than the sun. if you put a control rod in there it would instantly vaporize.
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#48I live near Princeton NJ. Approx 4+ years ago years ago I bumped into a friend one evening at a local restaurant / bar. As it turned out, her date was a top guy at the Princeton Plasma Labs.
Long to short, Gates assured me (paraphrasing), "We're close. It's doable. All we need is more funding."
I hope he's right.
p.s. I know PPPL might not be directly involved in this announcement. I was sharing context on the topic.
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#49After a few more major breakthroughs we'll be where fission was in 1942 after Fermi made the first man made neutron chain reaction. After that, we can see what a practical electricity producing plant looks like, and see how much people actually care about small amounts of tritium radiation.
At the moment fuel costs in fission are like 5-10% of total costs for a fission fleet. In fusion it could be lower, but that will not be any means mean the overall system will be cheaper.
We'll have to see the cost tradeoffs: fusion makes much less radioactive material per kWh than fission (but it still makes some) vs. simplicity. Fission is relatively trivial: just put special rocks in a grid and pump water over them as they pour out their star energy.
Progress is good and exciting, but I don't see any reason to think this will have major implications for energy systems anytime soon. Would be happy to be wrong though.
Disclaimer: I switched from studying fusion energy to advanced fission 16 years ago.
Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
#50Well... if Nuclear Fusion becomes actually possible in a cost-effective manner, so much for the need to roll out solar and wind-based electricity, which looks very much like a 1st-generation modern green energy technology in retrospect.
I'm not complaining. If we do crack the code on Nuclear Fusion, if I was the government, my next step would be to figure out how to build so many reactors that electricity costs go to basically zero. If you can charge your electric car for pennies, even the most diehard gas-car fans won't be able to resist. Offering a better product attracts far more users than, say, trying to shame people for CO2 usage (more flies with honey instead of vinegar).