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

ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 466 posts

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#91

Post by clomond »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #61
andrepd wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also a fusion power fanboy but >nuclear power is the only realistic way to solve the looming energy crisis of the 21st century while still maintaining the same standard of living for everyone This is just not true, there's no way you can say this. Solar costs are going down massively. Hydro is dirt cheap already. So renewables can absolutely be part of an energetic transition in the near future, while fusion is a…

Hydro is extremely restricted because of geographical and environmental constraints. Solar is also quite constrained by lack of large-scale storage and environmental concerns, and just by the weather. Same goes for wind. Keeping in mind that electricity production has to increase significantly to absorb the shift from ICE to EV vehicles I would tend to agree that there is no way to meet demand without nuclear even if…

I will challenge your assertion that energy storage is some kind of “deterministic barrier” that needs to be crossed before decarbonizing our grid.

Solar is still negligible in terms of penetration in many places in the world (even though it and wind are the cheapest new build primary energy today, so expect this to rapidly change). As well, you can add quite a bit of solar to a grid before curtailments become necessary.

Add that solar and wind pair together (when it’s not sunny, it’s often windy and visa versa). Many grids today (Uk, Denmark, Germany, etc) can have decent penetration of renewables with 0 energy storage.

Add in large scale grid interconnectivity (sunny in Nevada, windy in Idaho, Hydro in pacific north west) it will always be sunny and windy somewhere.

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#93

Post by m0zg »

matkoniecz wrote: post #87
m0zg wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hydro is dirt cheap already Said HN reader as the Three Gorges dam was about to burst in China, submerging millions of households.

[citation needed]

Are you even serious?

https://www.google.com/search?q=three+gorges+dam&newwindow=1...

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#94

Post by clomond »

scythe wrote: post #53
andrepd wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also a fusion power fanboy but >nuclear power is the only realistic way to solve the looming energy crisis of the 21st century while still maintaining the same standard of living for everyone This is just not true, there's no way you can say this. Solar costs are going down massively. Hydro is dirt cheap already. So renewables can absolutely be part of an energetic transition in the near future, while fusion is a…

>This is just not true, there's no way you can say this. Solar costs are going down massively. Hydro is dirt cheap already. So renewables can absolutely be part of an energetic transition in the near future, while fusion is at best many decades away. So while I think fusion energy has the potential to transform energy generation, and by extent everything about our life, it's wrong to assume renewables aren't probably…

Important distinction here: nobody actually cares or wants power that is baseload. In some cases it can actually be a bad thing.

The property you really want is “dispatchable”. There when you want it. Not when you don’t.

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#95

Post by Reason077 »

gautamcgoel wrote: post #2

I think fusion is cool, but I also think it distracts from more important and promising approaches to clean power. No one has ever demonstrated a self-sustaining, net positive fusion reaction. It will probably take >30 years to make this technology cheap , safe and reliable and another >20 years to deploy it at scale. We don't have 50 years to wait on clean energy, we need it today. We should be focusing our attentio…

> "I bet a concerted roll-out of nuclear + solar could cut US emissions due to electricity generation by at least 30% over the next 20 years."

30% over 20 years in unambitious. The UK has cut grid carbon emissions by 60% in the past 10 years. (2010 average: 467g/kWh. 2019 average: 189g/kWh). Emissions continue to decline every year.

This was largely achieved by closing coal power plants, and building a lot of wind (both on and off-shore), solar, biomass, and new interconnections with continental Europe. No new nuclear was built in this time. Wind is now the second largest source of electricity in the UK, after natural gas. (But natural gas usage is also declining!)

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#97

Post by VyperCard »

throwawaysea wrote: post #30

ITER won't be commercially viable. After ITER comes DEMO, which is itself a decades-long project. DEMO won't demonstrate electricity generation until 2048: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEMOnstration_Power_Station#Ti... In my mind, that means we need to see deployment of Gen 4 fission reactors ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor ) commercially, to bridge the gaps between a decline in coal-fired plan…

They take too long to build

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#98

Post by UweSchmidt »

dghughes wrote: post #74
jjoonathan wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hydro is actually pretty bad in terms of big safety incidents (Banqiao: 171000 dead, Machchu: 5000 dead, South Fork: 2208 dead) and solar/wind have trouble beating nuclear on metrics like death/watt because you need lots of infrastructure per watt. Picture a few large cities with contractors running around every roof tending to solar panels and compare to a few experts at a single nuclear power plant. For the contrac…

Hydroelectric projects also cause an increase in mercury levels specifically methylmercury. You'd think hydroelectric would be a safe method of generating power with flooding being the only bad effect. An Inuk guy in Labrador I follow on Twitter (@AndersenAngus) is trying to raise awareness about methylmercury due to flooding of land for hydroelectric dams. Here is some info on it via the Harvard School of Engineerin…

We are just so bad grasping the entire chain of effects of our actions, and the environment is incredibly complex. We need massive automated testing of environmental impact; systems that surveil ground, air, biodiversity over time all around the globe and particularly near projects like dams. It's no longer possible to just shrug it off, hope the planet can tolerate it and subconsciously accept some human loss in the name of progress.

Re: ITER: World's largest nuclear fusion project begins assembly

#100

Post by dantillberg »

cwhiz wrote: post #88
andrepd wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also a fusion power fanboy but >nuclear power is the only realistic way to solve the looming energy crisis of the 21st century while still maintaining the same standard of living for everyone This is just not true, there's no way you can say this. Solar costs are going down massively. Hydro is dirt cheap already. So renewables can absolutely be part of an energetic transition in the near future, while fusion is a…

I would like to see some models on how solar power could work in northern cities, or honestly any city. The NYC metro area has over 23 million residents and there is essentially zero space for a solar farm. In the winter it's cloudy almost all day and there are only 9 hours of sunlight. Rooftop solar is an option but the models I have seen show a theoretical max around 1,200 MW which is about 1/30th of the NYC metro…

You could imagine building a globe-spanning power distribution network. Solar panels on one side of the planet could provide power at night on the other side of the planet.
Post reply on HN