Breakthrough in fusion reactor design

Kburjr said:
I want my fusion energy flying car.
Click to expand...
I don’t trust you old people on the ground. Last thing we need is you buzzing around in the sky.
 
Kburjr said:
Not so damn fast.

www.science.org

With historic explosion, a long sought fusion breakthrough

National Ignition Facility achieves net energy “gain” with laser-powered approach
www.science.org www.science.org
Click to expand...
That's what this comic was referencing...
ill said:
hydropower_breakthrough.png
Click to expand...
 
I was pretty skeptical to begin with. Initially they made out it was a net energy gain, but now we know about the incredible amount of energy fed into the process and getting less out.

But I will give them props for achieving fusion at all.
 
rfjeff9 said:
I was pretty skeptical to begin with. Initially they made out it was a net energy gain, but now we know about the incredible amount of energy fed into the process and getting less out.

But I will give them props for achieving fusion at all.
Click to expand...
I give them credit for advancing the research and I give blame to the press for the uneducated hysteria
 
Kburjr said:
I give them credit for advancing the research and I give blame to the press for the uneducated hysteria
Click to expand...
hysteria around what?
 
ill said:
hysteria around what?
Click to expand...
"Free" energy.

We both understand how far away this technology is from being scaled up. To read that it is the solution to climate change is ludicrous at this point.
 
Kburjr said:
"Free" energy.

We both understand how far away this technology is from being scaled up. To read that it is the solution to climate change is ludicrous at this point.
Click to expand...
I don't think I fully understand what you identify as "free" energy...do you mean the whole concept of fusion?

or do you mean using renewables?
 
ill said:
I don't think I fully understand what you identify as "free" energy...do you mean the whole concept of fusion?

or do you mean using renewables?
Click to expand...
I was all-in on fusion before you were born. The general public and the popular press are acting like this announcement means that we can start capping wells and closing mines. They do not understand that we are just getting started.
 
Kburjr said:
I was all-in on fusion before you were born. The general public and the popular press are acting like this announcement means that we can start capping wells and closing mines. They do not understand that we are just getting started.
Click to expand...
you were all in on fusion before I was born? I don't see how that is possible as it wasn't anything more than a theory back then.

do you mean fission and what they use in nuclear plants?

I don't think anyone is saying cap wells and close mines over this recent discovery, but it is a huge discovery for the science.
 
ill said:
you were all in on fusion before I was born? I don't see how that is possible as it wasn't anything more than a theory back then.

do you mean fission and what they use in nuclear plants?

I don't think anyone is saying cap wells and close mines over this recent discovery, but it is a huge discovery for the science.
Click to expand...
No, I meant fusion. I started out in engineering in college in 1969. The main problem at that time was attaining high enough temperatures that was "solved" in the early 70s. Research for fusion generators dates back to the 40s. I grew up reading hard science fiction. Fusion propulsion systems was a common theme. Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe. If we ever get to the point of galactic exploration, fusion will get us there.
 
While the NIF actually lost 99% of its 400 megajoules input energy delivering 2 MJ of laser energy to the target fuel pellet, it nonetheless achieved its fusion threshold goal by producing 3 MJ, a positive energy gain of 150%, and a first for any fusion reactor. The reaction took place in less than a microsecond. (a MJ is less than 1/3 of a kwh).

It will take more than several decades to a century before a workable fusion reactor can be connected to the power grid supplying electricity to our homes. Here's a summary of problems to be overcome for this type of reactor:

1. "The NIF is built on 1980s laser technology,” said Kim Budil, director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, "the lasers are only 1 percent efficient in terms of turning electricity to laser light, while more modern designs can be 20 percent efficient."

2. The NIF reactor generates bursts of energy by quickly burning one tiny chunk of fuel after another. Scientists have yet to figure out how to replace the fuel pellets quickly enough to maintain a reaction for longer than the tiniest fraction of a second. Making it happen 10,000 times faster is absurdly difficult.

3.The NIF takes hours to recover from each experiment. The fact that NIF is able to do this once per day is a technical achievement that took years to perfect. NIF can only fire a few laser shots per day. To run an actual fusion reactor, you’d need to fire about 10 shots per second.

4. There is a dwindling supply of tritium, a key isotope that is combined with deuterium as fuel for the reaction.

5. The huge technical problem is maintaining a mass of plasma at a temperature of several million degrees to enable fusion, while extracting enough heat to provide useful energy.
 
jvett77 said:
While the NIF actually lost 99% of its 400 megajoules input energy delivering 2 MJ of laser energy to the target fuel pellet, it nonetheless achieved its fusion threshold goal by producing 3 MJ, a positive energy gain of 150%, and a first for any fusion reactor. The reaction took place in less than a microsecond. (a MJ is less than 1/3 of a kwh).

It will take more than several decades to a century before a workable fusion reactor can be connected to the power grid supplying electricity to our homes. Here's a summary of problems to be overcome for this type of reactor:

1. "The NIF is built on 1980s laser technology,” said Kim Budil, director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, "the lasers are only 1 percent efficient in terms of turning electricity to laser light, while more modern designs can be 20 percent efficient."

2. The NIF reactor generates bursts of energy by quickly burning one tiny chunk of fuel after another. Scientists have yet to figure out how to replace the fuel pellets quickly enough to maintain a reaction for longer than the tiniest fraction of a second. Making it happen 10,000 times faster is absurdly difficult.

3.The NIF takes hours to recover from each experiment. The fact that NIF is able to do this once per day is a technical achievement that took years to perfect. NIF can only fire a few laser shots per day. To run an actual fusion reactor, you’d need to fire about 10 shots per second.

4. There is a dwindling supply of tritium, a key isotope that is combined with deuterium as fuel for the reaction.

5. The huge technical problem is maintaining a mass of plasma at a temperature of several million degrees to enable fusion, while extracting enough heat to provide useful energy.
Click to expand...
Wouldnt Helium-3 be better?
 
Old Lion said:
Wouldnt Helium-3 be better?
Click to expand...

Good question. In exploring fusion research, H3 is a non-radioactive isotope and an ideal fuel for the operation of a fusion reactor; it consists of fusing helium‑3 with deuterium, rather than hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium used in the recent NIF test.

Getting large quantities of H3 is the problem. One scientist estimated that United States crustal natural gas sources may have only half a ton total. Then perhaps another 1,200 tons in interplanetary dust particles on the ocean floors. In a 1994 study, extracting helium-3 from these sources would consume more energy than fusion would release.

Unlike Earth, which is protected by its magnetic field, the Moon has been bombarded with large quantities of Helium-3 by the solar wind. Because of the low concentrations of helium-3, any mining equipment would need to process extremely large amounts of lunar crust, regolith, 150 tons to obtain one gram of helium-3.

Estimates say that the Moon's surface contains helium-3 at concentrations between 1.4 and 15 parts per billion in sunlit areas and as much as 50 ppb in shadowed regions. For comparison, helium-3 in the Earth's atmosphere occurs at 7.2 parts per trillion.

One optimistic article stated roughly 1.1 million metric tons of the H3 isotope exists on the Moon down to a depth of several meters. Twenty-five metric tons of helium-3, about a quarter of the cargo capacity of a SpaceX Starship, would suffice to fuel all the power needs of the United States for a year.

The Chinese Lunar Exploration Program is investigating lunar mining, specifically looking for the isotope helium-3 for use as an energy source on Earth. These efforts will be interesting over the next few decades but don't seem realistic right now. “The joke in fusion is that it’s been 30 years away for 50 years.”

02/28/21
Solving the climate and energy crises: Mine the Moon’s helium-3?
Helium-3 - Wikipedia
 
Kburjr said:
No, I meant fusion. I started out in engineering in college in 1969. The main problem at that time was attaining high enough temperatures that was "solved" in the early 70s. Research for fusion generators dates back to the 40s. I grew up reading hard science fiction. Fusion propulsion systems was a common theme. Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe. If we ever get to the point of galactic exploration, fusion will get us there.
Click to expand...
@ill never came back after that one.
 
Wild Turkey said:
@ill never came back after that one.
Click to expand...
sorry, didn't see it.

want me to respond to his science fiction comments? I appreciate your obsession in thinking that I got pwned

sure the idea of fusion has been around and there tons of spacecraft propulsion ideas out there, but we have never had a breakthrough in REAL LIFE like this before.
 
I've been thinking about perpetual motion all wrong, it seems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top