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

US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

energy.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#891

Post by lucumo »

scoopertrooper wrote: post #884
kubanczyk wrote: post #879

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > USA probably won't have an effective arsenal within a century. > If other countries joined, it would be a great outcome. Why the optimism? Without MAD, it's nearly certain that we'd have a world war at some point in time. Sooner or later, it will surely happen. If you think it won't happen, or won't cost millions of lives, or won't employ re-developed nukes eventually, please tell me why you think so. (No sarcasm…

I don’t think MAD is all that effective. At this moment in time we’re seeing: * Several concurrent arms races in the Middle East, Asia, and Europe * A high intensity conflict in Ukraine * China threatening a land invasion into Taiwan MAD might be preventing a country like Poland from jumping into the Ukraine conflict, but more likely it’s because of its involvement in NATO. I think collective security organisations a…

> I don’t think MAD is all that effective. At this moment in time we’re seeing: > * Several concurrent arms races in the Middle East, Asia, and Europe > * A high intensity conflict in Ukraine > * China threatening a land invasion into Taiwan

I mean... Only one of those is an actual fight. And there MAD doesn't apply because the defender doesn't have the Assured Destruction capability needed.

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#892

Post by mcculley »

defrost wrote: post #882
vincnetas wrote: post #881

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With abundant electricity wouldn't we face another type of global warming? We will would start to consume so much electricity that this will heat up the planet?

Relative scales of various factors matter here: We aren't "heating up the planet" .. we're "insulating the atmosphere". Increased C02 (and the close following methane and water vapor increases) serve to trap more of the heat radiated outwards that would otherwise escape. The vast bulk of that heat comes from the visible light of the sun which passes easily through the atmosphere coming in, gets converted to IR energy…

> We aren't "heating up the planet" .. we're "insulating the atmosphere".

We are doing both. We are doing more insulating than heating, but we obviously generate more heat.

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#893

Post by courgette »

moloch-hai wrote: post #784
jboy55 wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least ITER has a plausible, in a sci-fi story sense, way of creating a sustainable fusion reaction to which more fuel could be given. The fact the neutrons produced, if it did reach the high Q ratios, would irradiate and break down everything involved, is probably 2070's scientists and engineers problems to solve.

In that paradise of abundant cheap solar and wind power, only weapons people will be interested in fusion. They will probably be trying to come up with zero-fallout things they can use tactically.

I do software for a living so that gives you my level of ignorance of the real world.

I do have two question about solar

- is it “drivable” / “pilotable” ?

meaning reacting to surge in the grid? My understanding is that this feature is highly desirable for a grid.

- can we actually build enough solar panel, physically ?

Don’t we need some rare earth thingy that is not in sufficient quantity on our planet as far as we know ? ( follow up : if there is enough, will there be enough in 200 years ? )

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#894

Post by devmor »

panick21_ wrote: post #610
devmor wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The economic impact doesn't just come from the fuel to energy ratio. One of the biggest differences is also in the space required. Nuclear fusion reactors could eventually end up being very small - like smaller than an SUV. Imagine the cost savings in miniaturizing electrical grids.

Yeah but are you beating fission, something like: https://www.moltexflex.com/flex-reactor/ A small fission reactor can do almost everything a fusion reactor can. Fusion fuel is higher density, but fission density is already not an issue. Fusion still needs to heat water, that's where much of the cost comes from.

A small fission reactor is also incredibly dangerous and will always require exotic material.

A fusion reactor does not pose environmental risk and could eventually run on highly available basic elements for everything after the initial "startup" once the technology progresses.

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#895

Post by [deleted] »

scoopertrooper wrote: post #884
kubanczyk wrote: post #879

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > USA probably won't have an effective arsenal within a century. > If other countries joined, it would be a great outcome. Why the optimism? Without MAD, it's nearly certain that we'd have a world war at some point in time. Sooner or later, it will surely happen. If you think it won't happen, or won't cost millions of lives, or won't employ re-developed nukes eventually, please tell me why you think so. (No sarcasm…

I don’t think MAD is all that effective. At this moment in time we’re seeing: * Several concurrent arms races in the Middle East, Asia, and Europe * A high intensity conflict in Ukraine * China threatening a land invasion into Taiwan MAD might be preventing a country like Poland from jumping into the Ukraine conflict, but more likely it’s because of its involvement in NATO. I think collective security organisations a…

[deleted]

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#896

Post by kubanczyk »

hnuser123456 wrote: post #533
marcyb5st wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily. First generation stars were, theoretically, enormous both due to low metallicity of the collapsed medium and a higher average concentration of said medium. These stars lifespans were extremely short, shorter that blue giants we see today. So novas due to the death of these stars happened fairly early in the lifespan of the universe (talking about few million years after the big bang). Therefore, life…

Basic life (single-celled?) requiring the elements above lead might have a chance at that time, but complex life like us wouldn't do so well if there were still supernovas going off left and right. There's a theory with decent evidence that at least one of the mass extinctions was caused by a supernova: https://www.space.com/supernova-caused-earth-mass-extinction... That being said, I wasn't aware of how LIGO changed…

> how LIGO changed the understanding of how heavier elements are usually formed, guessing it changed the expected neutron star prevalence?

It's not about the prevalence, but about the light curves observed during the event AT 2017gfo. They indicate significant heavy metal ejection but, what's interesting, also production.

> mergers of neutron stars contribute to rapid neutron capture (r-process) nucleosynthesis

These two articles cite the relevant papers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GW170817#Scientific_importance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#Neutron_star_c...

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#897

Post by basilgohar »

scoopertrooper wrote: post #884
kubanczyk wrote: post #879

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > USA probably won't have an effective arsenal within a century. > If other countries joined, it would be a great outcome. Why the optimism? Without MAD, it's nearly certain that we'd have a world war at some point in time. Sooner or later, it will surely happen. If you think it won't happen, or won't cost millions of lives, or won't employ re-developed nukes eventually, please tell me why you think so. (No sarcasm…

I don’t think MAD is all that effective. At this moment in time we’re seeing: * Several concurrent arms races in the Middle East, Asia, and Europe * A high intensity conflict in Ukraine * China threatening a land invasion into Taiwan MAD might be preventing a country like Poland from jumping into the Ukraine conflict, but more likely it’s because of its involvement in NATO. I think collective security organisations a…

There are a lot more armed conflicts throughout the world that are proxies or partial proxies between the various powers in the world (US, Russia, and more). See Yemen, Syria, and many more throughout Africa. World powers tend to get on one side or another as they see their interests align and oftentimes this prolongs the conflict rather than bring it to any resolution.

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#898

Post by defrost »

mcculley wrote: post #892
defrost wrote: post #882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relative scales of various factors matter here: We aren't "heating up the planet" .. we're "insulating the atmosphere". Increased C02 (and the close following methane and water vapor increases) serve to trap more of the heat radiated outwards that would otherwise escape. The vast bulk of that heat comes from the visible light of the sun which passes easily through the atmosphere coming in, gets converted to IR energy…

> We aren't "heating up the planet" .. we're "insulating the atmosphere". We are doing both. We are doing more insulating than heating, but we obviously generate more heat.

Did you actually read my comment to the end?

If so, how'd you do on the numbers?

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#899

Post by rbanffy »

jboy55 wrote: post #757
moloch-hai wrote: post #736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly the opposite: their task, assigned by Congress, is weapons work . Period. But pretending to work on "carbon-free energy" is good for funding, just now . Four years ago, being all about weapons opened the tap. Make no mistake, there is no story here. There will be no "unlimited free energy" from this, or any other fusion project. The fusion startups are spending down investors' money with zero possibility of p…

At least ITER has a plausible, in a sci-fi story sense, way of creating a sustainable fusion reaction to which more fuel could be given. The fact the neutrons produced, if it did reach the high Q ratios, would irradiate and break down everything involved, is probably 2070's scientists and engineers problems to solve.

> is probably 2070's scientists and engineers problems to solve.

With some clever choices in building materials, we may be able to dismantle ITER and its successors to use them as fission fuels.

Re: US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

#900

Post by jononomo »

petilon wrote: post #349
mustacheemperor wrote: post #2

I don't know about everyone else, but I'm taking this particular moment just to swell with pride and excitement for this achievement by science and forget about the details of how much more needs to be done to create the first power plant. I'm remembering when I first learned about fusion energy development, how distant and unfeasible it seemed, and regardless of how long the road ahead still is it's incredible how f…

When you consider that they laser they used consumed 300 megajoules from the wall plug, in order to send 1.8 megajoules to the target, the fact that they got 2.5 megajoules out looks puny in comparison. Even newer lasers only have 20% wall plug efficiency according to the press conference. So the important point here is, there was no net energy gain. They spent 300 megajoules to get 2.5 out. The scientists only talk…

Also, they’re not counting all the meals the scientists ate —- this is total BS.
Post reply on HN