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

Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 833 posts

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#681

Post by trashtester »

preisschild wrote: post #665
sushisource wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This minimizes the main problem with really going full renewables, storage. Fusion is 24/7 output at the same level. Solar and wind are not, which means batteries, and all the problems associated with that. Fusion could obviate the need for grid-wide storage systems which would be a huge advantage.

Unfortunately 100% renewable advocates just throw LCOE numbers around even though LCOE doesn't account for storage at all. Levelized Full System Costs of Electricity (LFSCOE) does include storage and suddenly nuclear fission gets a lot more competitive: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4028640

Precisely this. Do they have similar numbers available for Korea?

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#682

Post by fidelramos »

limaoscarjuliet wrote: post #674
deng wrote: post #664

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Very disappointed by the discourse in this HN thread. The same old quips over and over. To be fair, that's not entirely the fault of HN. It's hard to get excited about fusion research when I almost always feel mislead, because it is almost never explicitly stated that we are talking about Q-plasma here. I don't expect much from science journalism, but I feel that the fusion scientists have no problem silently playi…

Plus, this is about 10-th time in the last 10 years we are told "we are around the corner, clean energy will save us". Please tune down the message.

I like how this graph describes why nuclear fusion technology always seems to be "just around the corner": https://imgur.com/a/59NO34a

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#683

Post by Schroedingersat »

543g43g43 wrote: post #659
Schroedingersat wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the energy that is cheaper than coal and driving operating coal plants out of business will make the cost of producing it go up when the share increases? These mental gymnastics routines are olympic level.

The reason we can ignore the huge manufacturing energy inputs required to make solar panels, is because it's powered by cheap domestic coal in China. >driving operating coal plants out of business Any specific ones? The only coal plants I've seen get shut down are because of environmental reasons (or age). Some countries, like Germany and China, are re-opening or building new coal plants. Talking of mental gymnastics…

Try a new solar panel rather than one from the 90s. Your Shellenberger tripe about EROI went off when the EROI of solar surpassed that of nuclear and EPBT dropped below 18 months (or 6 months in sunny countries). Then it went even more ranc

If you're really worried about it, buy a panel from europe, the polysilicon (90% of the energy) comes from hydro, wind, and nuclear powered countries.

Even if all the money for a solar module went to coal generation at chinese or indian prices and nothing else it would pay back that power in under two years.

If the only activity involved in making PV was to spend the entire system cost on lignite and burn it directly at the mine front, it would *still* produce more energy in its lifetime than putting the coal in a coal plant.

It's absolutely laughable that you think you can keep spouting this ridiculous lie.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#684

Post by trashtester »

epivosism wrote: post #625
cwingrav wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fukushima, Kyshtym… those are the other bad ones.

FYI, there were zero radiation deaths from Fukishima, although there were ~2200 from the evacuation. Keep in mind this was during the aftermath of a tsunami. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disa...

I think 1 person from the cleanup crew eventually got a cancer linked to the accident, but maybe he survivied?

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#685

Post by trashtester »

sanxiyn wrote: post #603
Galaxeblaffer wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's simply still not true. the last three plants built in Europe (England, France and Finland) has been very expensive because they've all been first of its kind and there hasn't really been built anything else. but if you take a look at what's happening elsewhere in the world KHNP for example has their standardized APR1400 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/APR-1400 reactor that seems to be very affordable Poland ju…

Note that economics doesn't work even with Korean nuclear plants: Korean nuclear is cheaper than Korean gas, but more expensive than European gas, because European gas is pipelined, Korean gas is liquified, and liquified gas is so much more expensive than pipelined gas. European nuclear initiatives are mostly about strategic concerns to get out of Russian gas. Economically, even the cheapest nuclear power on Earth ca…

European gas is cheap as long as we're willing to hand over control of Europe's energy supply to Putin. Which most countries in Europe no longer are, and maybe never will be again.

Meanwhile the largest known deposits of Uranium can be found in Australia and Canada, making them much safer sources for western countries.

If EU countries allow fracking domestically, this will change, of course. Though the same "green" movement that opposes nuclear is likly to try to block this. Maybe we should look at how much funding these people get from Russia?

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#686

Post by msla »

Ruq wrote: post #139

The pessimist in me says that some building(s) are going to burn down, one or more persons will be found with two bullet wounds as "obvious suicide", and that any and all supporting documents will be "lost". Because we simply cannot live in a world where we are independent from the current power structure. They won't allow it. Hopefully I'm wrong, I'd love to see progress in energy production that is actually sustain…

That isn't how They would do it were They to set Their face against fusion.

They'd just make people afraid: Focus on how it's nuclear, how it's dangerous, and get the people to want it banned. A few laws in some key jurisdictions and it's over, and the scientists can rant as much as they want, it'll never be a problem again.

Of course, all of that partakes of the comforting illusion there even is a Them in the world.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#687

Post by artifact_44 »

hawtkey wrote: post #556
floxy wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Their most recent article has a ton of great data and next steps: That device in the photo is great. Looks to be about 16AWG magnet wire. Guessing a 10mm ID of the coil, and about 25mm in length. To get to 26 Tesla, looks like you'd need to push about 33,000 A through that coil. Coil inductance might be about 1uH, and if the test lasts ~1us, then you'd need 33kV to push that 33kA through the coil. 30kV/inch insulati…

here's a video that shows a machine at Berkeley lab that makes a high-performance magnet wire, not sure if it's related to this project but still pretty interesting to see how complex just the wire is- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmmNRaKpBTI&t=2138s

No post body was provided.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#688

Post by 543g43g43 »

Schroedingersat wrote: post #683
543g43g43 wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason we can ignore the huge manufacturing energy inputs required to make solar panels, is because it's powered by cheap domestic coal in China. >driving operating coal plants out of business Any specific ones? The only coal plants I've seen get shut down are because of environmental reasons (or age). Some countries, like Germany and China, are re-opening or building new coal plants. Talking of mental gymnastics…

Try a new solar panel rather than one from the 90s. Your Shellenberger tripe about EROI went off when the EROI of solar surpassed that of nuclear and EPBT dropped below 18 months (or 6 months in sunny countries). Then it went even more ranc If you're really worried about it, buy a panel from europe, the polysilicon (90% of the energy) comes from hydro, wind, and nuclear powered countries. Even if all the money for a…

>the EROI of solar surpassed that of nuclear

Where do you get your numbers from?

>it would pay back that power in under two years.

That's exactly the problem. This is a significant portion of the lifetime output of the panels.

>it would still produce more energy in its lifetime than putting the coal in a coal plant.

I'm not arguing that solar panels are a net negative, as you seem to be implying. I'm arguing that the energy economics of a world fuelled entirely by solar (and other renewable technologies - solar is about the worst for EROI) would look very different to what we have now.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#689

Post by Schroedingersat »

543g43g43 wrote: post #688
Schroedingersat wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try a new solar panel rather than one from the 90s. Your Shellenberger tripe about EROI went off when the EROI of solar surpassed that of nuclear and EPBT dropped below 18 months (or 6 months in sunny countries). Then it went even more ranc If you're really worried about it, buy a panel from europe, the polysilicon (90% of the energy) comes from hydro, wind, and nuclear powered countries. Even if all the money for a…

>the EROI of solar surpassed that of nuclear Where do you get your numbers from? >it would pay back that power in under two years. That's exactly the problem. This is a significant portion of the lifetime output of the panels. >it would still produce more energy in its lifetime than putting the coal in a coal plant. I'm not arguing that solar panels are a net negative, as you seem to be implying. I'm arguing that the…

Crystalline Solar panels have a benchmark lifetime of 30 years and are consistently outperforming predicted degradation rates. None have worn out yet, but the best guess is a median 40 year lifetime. A new panasonic or jinko mono panel installed in india has epbt under 6 months and an eroi around 100.

You're the one making the insane claims. You back them up.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#690

Post by [deleted] »

SantalBlush wrote: post #533
jkelleyrtp wrote: post #447

Very disappointed by the discourse in this HN thread. The same old quips over and over. "NIF is just a nuclear stewardship program", "it's not actually generating power", "fusion still 30 years away". I think it's very clear, given the past year that NIF has had, that they are very rapidly approaching a point where we have the tech to "solve" inertial fusion. https://lasers.llnl.gov/news/papers-presentations Getting…

>Very disappointed by the discourse in this HN thread. The same old quips over and over. We see these comments on every science thread because almost all of these people lack the requisite expertise to weigh in on the actual details, so instead they make a high-level criticism to give the appearance of having some kind of knowledge on the subject. Moreover, they think that crapping on things equates to being a critic…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN