Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming • Hacker News Board

Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming

#81

Post by neltnerb » Sun, Nov 14, 2021, 6:03 AM UTC

Tuna-Fish wrote: post #37

neltnerb wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Iter uses superconducting magnets. They are the best superconducting magnets that were available when the design was finalized in 1998. Modern ones are much better.

Sorry, yes, you're right, I meant modern ones.

Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming

#82

Post by tim333 » Sun, Nov 14, 2021, 4:23 PM UTC

Shadonototra wrote: post #58

dang wrote: post #52

Recent and related: Helion - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29119180 - Nov 2021 (249 comments)

Just for general information, YCombinator is an investor of that particular "new" company. Nuclear fusion isn't a new thing, many already established companies are working on it, making the headline and focus on this particular one is disingenuous, to say the least https://www.helionenergy.com/who-we-are/

Helion is the only one I know that's saying they'll "demonstrate net electricity production, as early as 2024." Maybe they will maybe they won't but it makes a change from the usual "maybe in thirty years" stuff.

Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming

#83

Post by tim333 » Sun, Nov 14, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

ncmncm wrote: post #75

aetherson wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that seven years ago, Helion said they were three years away from energy positive fusion. Today, they say they're... Three years away from energy positive fusion.

They said they were three years away given investment, which they did not get. Now they have the investment they said, then, such progress would depend upon. Tokamak eating all the fusion research capital has much to answer for. The only sense I can find in Tokamak exclusivity is that aneutronic fusion research does not maintain employment of a population of hot-neutron physicists that weapons work would need to draw…

The SPARC/ARC thing seems to make sense as a research project. I'm not sure ITER is a good use of funds though.

Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming

#84

Post by tim333 » Sun, Nov 14, 2021, 5:57 PM UTC

simonblack wrote: post #78

platz wrote: post #3

> 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.

To us older and more cynical old farts, the story has been: "Fusion power is twenty years away". It's been that for nearly 70 years. I don't see anything changing that elderly estimate for at least another 50 years. (And that's being optimistic.)

Helion is changing that story to fusion power always being three years away.

Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming

#85

Post by tim333 » Sun, Nov 14, 2021, 6:06 PM UTC

dwheeler wrote: post #17

platz wrote: post #3

> 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.

Their current prototype, no 6, reached 100 million C. The next, prototype 7 they say should produce net electricity in 2023 or so. We'll see. That's not commercial electricity production but any production would be a step forward.

Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming

#86

Post by ncmncm » Sun, Nov 14, 2021, 11:50 PM UTC

tim333 wrote: post #83

ncmncm wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They said they were three years away given investment, which they did not get. Now they have the investment they said, then, such progress would depend upon. Tokamak eating all the fusion research capital has much to answer for. The only sense I can find in Tokamak exclusivity is that aneutronic fusion research does not maintain employment of a population of hot-neutron physicists that weapons work would need to draw…

The SPARC/ARC thing seems to make sense as a research project. I'm not sure ITER is a good use of funds though.

I am dead certain ITER is not a good use of funds.

At least, for any public goal. Certainly the people--military contractors, mainly, I expect--whose pockets the $billions are going into may be justified in considering it a good use. Not a single penny disappears; each goes into somebody's account.

Re: Nuclear fusion is close enough to start dreaming

#87

Post by sbierwagen » Mon, Nov 15, 2021, 4:38 AM UTC

Eelongate wrote: post #50

bluecalm wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First question I have about it: wouldn't it be an attractive target for bombing/terrorist attacks or would it be rock solid enough to withstand those?

The threat of terrorism is massively overblown across the board, not just with respect to nuclear waste. The means to make conventional explosives are widely available, yet outside of a handful of conflict zones it is rarely done. Americans can buy gunpowder at walmart, yet how many pipebomb attacks have you heard of? A handful, but not many. Not many considering the country has hundreds of millions of people with re…

>The threat of terrorism is massively overblown

There's some temporal sampling bias, here.

The threat of terrorism was huge and salient in 2002, and a lot of NRC regulations were updated at that time. It was less obvious in 2010. Here in 2021 it's hardly a threat at all. If we see another 9/11-scale attack this decade you can bet that will change.