Potentially World Changing Fusion Reactor

Winston · Mar 27, 2018

Really hope this works:

Lockheed Martin Now Has a Patent For Its Potentially World Changing Fusion Reactor
When it first announced the project, the company said it could have a working prototype of the revolutionary power source as early as 2019.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...its-potentially-world-changing-fusion-reactor

Lockheed Martin has quietly obtained a patent associated with its design for a potentially revolutionary compact fusion reactor, or CFR. If this project has been progressing on schedule, the company could debut a prototype system the size of shipping container, but capable of powering a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier or 80,000 homes, sometime in the next year or so.

If the system works, it’s hard to underscore just how dramatically it could change not just the future of warfare, but the basic nature of human existence. Running on approximately 25 pounds of fuel – a mixture of hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium – Lockheed Martin estimated the notional reactor would be able to run for an entire year without stopping. The device would be able to generate a constant 100 megawatts of power during that period.

[video=youtube;UlYClniDFkM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlYClniDFkM[/video]

prfesser · Mar 29, 2018

I don't like to be the guy who pees on the campfire...but this kind of 'breakthrough' has been announced, re-announced, and announced yet again for decades. If memory serves, this particular version of the savior-of-humanity device was first announced by Lockheed Martin about three years back. It was supposed to be about the size that could be hauled by a pickup truck, and they expected a working prototype within a year...

If it eventually works and is put into production, no one will be more excited than me. Until then, I'm afraid I must remain a devoted skeptic.

Best,
Terry

Peartree · Mar 29, 2018

prfesser said:
I don't like to be the guy who pees on the campfire...but this kind of 'breakthrough' has been announced, re-announced, and announced yet again for decades. If memory serves, this particular version of the savior-of-humanity device was first announced by Lockheed Martin about three years back. It was supposed to be about the size that could be hauled by a pickup truck, and they expected a working prototype within a year...

If it eventually works and is put into production, no one will be more excited than me. Until then, I'm afraid I must remain a devoted skeptic.

Best,
Terry

I'm with you here. If it was fusion was this easy, then why are labs around the world spending billion$ building Tokamaks and other designs to try to pull it off?

dr wogz · Mar 29, 2018

it works on TV, so it's only a matter time, right?!

And seriously, do certain companies / individuals want us to have super cheap clean energy?

Zeus-cat · Mar 29, 2018

It is the difference between theory and actual engineering. Really smart people can think up a great idea, but they need brilliant engineers to build it.

boatgeek · Mar 29, 2018

dr wogz said:
it works on TV, so it's only a matter time, right?!

And seriously, do certain companies / individuals want us to have super cheap clean energy?

I think LockMart probably does, if for no other reason than that they would make fabulous amounts of money until the patent ran out. That and if they do this successfully, there's a whole lot of high tech (lasers, etc.) that they can sell to the Military Industrial Complex for ships and large planes. 100 MW of lasers in a box that can be carried by a 100' boat or a C5 would get a lot of interest at the Pentagon. Whole swaths of various militaries would become obsolete in an instant.

That said, I'm not holding my breath. Fusion is the power of 30 years in the future and always will be and all that.

PropellantHead · Mar 29, 2018

I don't see what the big deal is. I already have one at home.

aerostadt · Mar 29, 2018

The video is all hype and doesn't say anything about real progress. I didn't see any mention about deuterium-tritium, but if that was used, then there is a flux of high energy neutrons that need to be handled. Also, a source of tritium is needed or a way to recover tritium from the high energy neutrons, which is going to add weight and handling problems.

markkoelsch · Mar 29, 2018

prfesser said:
I don't like to be the guy who pees on the campfire...but this kind of 'breakthrough' has been announced, re-announced, and announced yet again for decades. If memory serves, this particular version of the savior-of-humanity device was first announced by Lockheed Martin about three years back. It was supposed to be about the size that could be hauled by a pickup truck, and they expected a working prototype within a year...

If it eventually works and is put into production, no one will be more excited than me. Until then, I'm afraid I must remain a devoted skeptic.

Best,
Terry

Terry, I am in agreement with you. I hope they have one that works. I hope they mass market it and make a ton of money too.

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

jnobels · Mar 30, 2018

I recall reading this a couple of years ago. The fact that its LM indicates that its probably not entirely without some basis in fact. But until somebody builds it and demonstrates it, I cant bring myself to care. Too many disappointments of over the years with announced tech that has never materialized. You can patent just about anything but until the engineers build one, its just scribbles on paper.

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

Steve Shannon · Mar 30, 2018

I confess I dont really follow fusion research as well as I would like. When the ions collide and release their million times more energy than possible with chemicals, is that something that could have direct application as a high thrust rocket motor with a magnetic field for a nozzle?
Im not asking about normal low thrust ion or plasma drives.

ColumbiaNX01 · Mar 30, 2018

I still love my Oil! Until they have a power source they can put in in a truck that can get as much torque and horsepower and can go the same distance as a modern Diesel engine from the Big 3. Until then this crap is a fairy tale.

rharshberger · Mar 30, 2018

ColumbiaNX01 said:
I still love my Oil! Until they have a power source they can put in in a truck that can get as much torque and horsepower and can go the same distance as a modern Diesel engine from the Big 3. Until then this crap is a fairy tale.

As batteries get lighter and higher capacity it won't be to many years and electric motors will be superior to combustion motors for both range and power application. And while many people bitch about nuclear power of any type due to the few accidents that have occurred, the fact is that for the amount of waste created no other energy source has a smaller footprint on the environment. Wind power takes up huge sections of land and is ugly, coal is relatively dirty ( better with modern tech than it was), and hydro while technically the cleanest is also one of the most enviromentally changing as it alters entire river ecosystems. I too like my diesel and gas motors, but the future is in electric.

markkoelsch · Mar 30, 2018

ColumbiaNX01 said:
I still love my Oil! Until they have a power source they can put in in a truck that can get as much torque and horsepower and can go the same distance as a modern Diesel engine from the Big 3. Until then this crap is a fairy tale.

Torque- electric motors win hands down.

Not sure about horsepower.

Range- that will improve in time.

This is assuming the power grid can handle all these electric vehicles, and that we do not run out of lithium.

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

ColumbiaNX01 · Mar 30, 2018

rharshberger said:
As batteries get lighter and higher capacity it won't be to many years and electric motors will be superior to combustion motors for both range and power application. And while many people bitch about nuclear power of any type due to the few accidents that have occurred, the fact is that for the amount of waste created no other energy source has a smaller footprint on the environment. Wind power takes up huge sections of land and is ugly, coal is relatively dirty ( better with modern tech than it was), and hydro while technically the cleanest is also one of the most enviromentally changing as it alters entire river ecosystems. I too like my diesel and gas motors, but the future is in electric.

Smart man you are. I have always said we need more Nuclear power plants.

ColumbiaNX01 · Mar 30, 2018

markkoelsch said:
Torque- electric motors win hands down.

Not sure about horsepower.

Range- that will improve in time.

This is assuming the power grid can handle all these electric vehicles, and that we do not run out of lithium.

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

Electric motors have 100% torque immediately. Time will tell, until then I love my smoky diesel!!!

Charles_McG · Mar 30, 2018

I dont think batteries as we know them will ever get near fossil fuels in J/g. Theres that whole carrying around your electron sink with you (like jet vs rocket impulse). And the energy in the bonds involved. And the molar density.

Flow through electrochemical cells might get closer. Imagine two fuel tanks - pump from one to the other through the cell. Go to the gas station and swap the flat liquid for fresh. Station uses local or grid power to regenerate the liquid. We might still call them batteries for lack of a better word.

I doubt the energizer that runs a lightsaber stores its energy in covalent bonds.

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

rharshberger · Mar 30, 2018

Charles_McG said:
I dont think batteries as we know them will ever get near fossil fuels in J/g. Theres that whole carrying around your electron sink with you (like jet vs rocket impulse). And the energy in the bonds involved. And the molar density.

Flow through electrochemical cells might get closer. Imagine two fuel tanks - pump from one to the other through the cell. Go to the gas station and swap the flat liquid for fresh. Station uses local or grid power to regenerate the liquid. We might still call them batteries for lack of a better word.

I doubt the energizer that runs a lightsaber stores its energy in covalent bonds.

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

Battery or something else it needs to be a high efficiency and capacity storage and retrieval system whatever it is.

rharshberger · Mar 30, 2018

ColumbiaNX01 said:
Smart man you are. I have always said we need more Nuclear power plants.

Bechtel is building a brand new nucke power plant in southern Georgia (USA) right now, first new plant in many years. As for nuke waste the plant that has been operating near me for over twenty years has its entire spent fuel supply stored in dry cask storage in an area about the size of a basketball court. Each cask is 10 or so feet in diameter and about 20' tall. I drive within 3 miles of that plant every day on my way to work. WNP2 ( Columbia Generating Station) is the plant only operating nuke plant in WA.

Peartree · Mar 30, 2018

ColumbiaNX01 said:
Smart man you are. I have always said we need more Nuclear power plants.

Our electric power provider just announced that it is closing all (three or four) of it's nuke plants in Ohio and Pennsylvania because they can't compete profitably at the current electricity prices. It wants the state to allow them to charge customers and extra 180 million dollars per year to keep them open and both Ohio and Pennsylvania said "No."

r66astro · Mar 30, 2018

When a 747 takes off with electric motors and fly's to New Zealand, I will introduce you to my flying pigs.

boatgeek · Mar 30, 2018

r66astro said:
When a 747 takes off with electric motors and fly's to New Zealand, I will introduce you to my flying pigs.

That'll be a long wait, since there aren't any more 747s in passenger service and not all that many in cargo service anymore.

Seriously though, ships and aircraft are probably going to be the last equipment to run electric. Despite the marketing from Tesla, I have doubts about long-haul trucks, too.

On the other hand, my 2013 Nissan Leaf has enough range to cover ~80% of commutes in the US, costs 2 cents a mile to run (at admittedly low electric power costs), and charges in a standard 110-volt outlet in my garage. In the past two years, its only maintenance was a pair of tires and a cabin air filter, which is pretty awesome for a 5-year-old car going 5K miles a year. You could replace an awful lot of fossil fuels with cars like that while saving consumers money and having cars that are fun to drive. I would love to get Chrysler's new plug-in hybrid minivan to replace my Dodge minivan, but I can't justify the cost or the risk of buying a first model year vehicle.

Also, residential and industrial power usage is trending down enough that utilities are hoping electric cars will keep demand up. https://www.npr.org/2018/03/29/5980...c-cars-as-their-savior-amid-decline-in-demand

rharshberger · Mar 30, 2018

Peartree said:
Our electric power provider just announced that it is closing all (three or four) of it's nuke plants in Ohio and Pennsylvania because they can't compete profitably at the current electricity prices. It wants the state to allow them to charge customers and extra 180 million dollars per year to keep them open and both Ohio and Pennsylvania said "No."

I would not be surprised to learn that the reason those reactors are no longer profitable is due to age and maintenance, most commercial nuke reactors are getting near the end of their design life anyways, and retro-fitting them just isnt economical, however the newest gen reactors are more efficient and iirc can utilize cheaper fuels that arent as pure as older reactors require.

Peartree · Mar 30, 2018

rharshberger said:
I would not be surprised to learn that the reason those reactors are no longer profitable is due to age and maintenance, most commercial nuke reactors are getting near the end of their design life anyways, and retro-fitting them just isnt economical, however the newest gen reactors are more efficient and iirc can utilize cheaper fuels that arent as pure as older reactors require.

Of course they're old and end of life. FERC hasn't licensed a new nuke plant in the US in thirty years. Most nuke plants in the US passed their designed end-of-life ten or fifteen years ago. But, FWIW, one of those plants being shut down was shut down, completely refurbished and restarted just a few years ago. You might have read about it. It made national news because the lid of the reactor vessel had to be replaced because it had corroded/worn/eaten/? to the point that it would have failed in a few more years. The problem was, no one expected to see that kind of wear in the place that they found it and it launched a nationwide inspection of reactor vessels in every licensed plant.

Cabernut · Mar 30, 2018

Eventually, it's going to get figured out. There's plenty of money in it to make all the research worthwhile at that point. Then comes a new "gold rush" for fusion reactor fuel.
[youtube]x3Kvo6eVPtw[/youtube]

shreadvector · Mar 31, 2018

747-8i new passenger models built and delivered recently and in service.

Still building 747-8F and VIP versions.

boatgeek said:
That'll be a long wait, since there aren't any more 747s in passenger service and not all that many in cargo service anymore. Seriously though, ships and aircraft are probably going to be the last equipment to run electric. Despite the marketing from Tesla, I have doubts about long-haul trucks, too.

On the other hand, my 2013 Nissan Leaf has enough range to cover ~80% of commutes in the US, costs 2 cents a mile to run (at admittedly low electric power costs), and charges in a standard 110-volt outlet in my garage. In the past two years, its only maintenance was a pair of tires and a cabin air filter, which is pretty awesome for a 5-year-old car going 5K miles a year. You could replace an awful lot of fossil fuels with cars like that while saving consumers money and having cars that are fun to drive. I would love to get Chrysler's new plug-in hybrid minivan to replace my Dodge minivan, but I can't justify the cost or the risk of buying a first model year vehicle.

Also, residential and industrial power usage is trending down enough that utilities are hoping electric cars will keep demand up. https://www.npr.org/2018/03/29/5980...c-cars-as-their-savior-amid-decline-in-demand

markkoelsch · Mar 31, 2018

Cabernut said:
Eventually, it's going to get figured out. There's plenty of money in it to make all the research worthwhile at that point. Then comes a new "gold rush" for fusion reactor fuel.
[youtube]x3Kvo6eVPtw[/youtube]

Maybe it will get figured out. It might not. I still want to see them contain the fusion temperature plasma continuously. That would be a good trick.

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

aerostadt · Mar 31, 2018

I found another video (see below) that shows two magnetic rings in the Lockheed concept and mentions the deuterium-tritium reaction along with generating probably tritium. I see 2 magnetic mirrors in a simplified fusion book dated 1969 from my book shelf. This concept is very old and tried. The first video mentioned a high beta, which as I recall is indicative of the strength of the induced magnetic field to the imposed magnetic field. It is difficult to understand what is new and profound here.

[video=youtube;7-ln8xiEVB8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-ln8xiEVB8[/video]

PropellantHead · Mar 31, 2018

shreadvector said:
747-8i new passenger models built and delivered recently and in service.

Still building 747-8F and VIP versions.

Yes and it's the last gasp for that venerable lady. ALL carriers in the U.S. have stopped using 747s and the number of international carriers using them is shrinking almost yearly. KLM announced less than two weeks ago that it has stopped flying 747 combis to Houston and will switch that route over to 787 Dreamliners. They also play to phase out their remaining 12 747s in "coming years" in favor of the 787.

Potentially World Changing Fusion Reactor

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Lorenzo von Matterhorn

LIFETIME SUPPORTER

Cyborg Rocketeer

Fly caster

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Red blooded white American male

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Red blooded white American male

Red blooded white American male

Ciderwright

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Cyborg Rocketeer

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Cyborg Rocketeer

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Join the conversation!

Join today and get all the highlights of this community direct to your inbox. It's FREE!