Fusion Breakthough

[Hobie1dog]

The amount of lunar rock that would need to be mined to extract He3 is staggering. Robert Zubrin also talks about this is in his book, "The Case for Space"

Abstract​

"With fossil fuels running out and global energy demand increasing, the need for alternative energy sources is apparent. Nuclear fusion using Helium-3 may be a solution. Helium-3 is a rare isotope on Earth, but it is abundant on the Moon. Throughout the space community lunar Helium-3 is often cited as a major reason to return to the Moon."

Unbelievably ignorant. We have more reasonable energy sources here on Earth than we know what to do with. The only thing we would need oil for is to make grease for bearings.

Solar---cover 200 square miles of unused desert out West and it will power up the entire USA. Wind, current generators in rivers, tidal generators along the coasts, and the biggest one is geothermal, available around the entire planet. All of these have zero negative effect on the planet. Do we want more Chernobyl disasters of any type?

 

[Funkworks]

It's so convenient for them to ignore the massive amounts of energy it took to run the entire experiment. They are selectively looking at a small portion (the end) of the entire system.

THIS. If you have to ignore the overhead to show a positive balance, you cheated.

What you two are suggesting cannot be done without going through this step first. It's not about ignoring and selecting, it's about picking a project that is thought to be achievable, and finally, they achieved what they set out to do.

 

[neil_w]

What you two are suggesting cannot be done without going through this step first. It's not about ignoring and selecting, it's about picking a project that is thought to be achievable, and fortunately, they achieved what they set out to do.

The point being that this is a significant step, but there are *many* steps yet to be taken on the way to commercially viable fusion. Journey of 1000 miles yadda yadda. But I agree in general that calling this particular step "net positive" is really misleading.

 

[Marc_G]

Also remember that human/animal power led to wide scale use of wood as a power source. Wood use for power and development eventually made coal practical. Coal power led to our ability to use oil. Fossil fuels generally led to our ability to do wide scale production of electricity. All of these led to and were required to come up with fission power. Same will go for fusion. Just because it can't yet be self sustaining in development mode isn't an issue; all prior power formats required their predecessors until they were fully bootstrapped.

 

[Funkworks]

... calling this particular step "net positive" is really misleading.

To a nuclear physicist, what matters is what comes out the pellet given what goes in. The objective achieved here was clearly a net positive. To a laser physicist, what matters is what comes out the laser given what goes in, this is necessarily a "net negative". There is no confusion about this for those in the project, but perhaps among the public.

So for anyone wondering where's the net positive, just look at the arrows in this box:

Now if you're going to consider how the atoms are purified and how the grid is powered and the lasers and the factories manufacturing the shoes worn by lab technicians, and those farmed the food their ancesters ate, then make your own drawing and calculations . Fusion people have enough on their plate already.

Also remember that human/animal power led to wide scale use of wood as a power source. Wood use for Powe and development eventually made coal practical. Coal power led to our ability to use oil. Fossil fuels generally led to our ability to do wide scale production of electricity. All of these led to and were required to come up with fission power. Same will go for fusion. Just because it can't yet be self sustaining in development mode isn't an issue; all prior power formats required their predecessors until they were fully bootstrapped.

Also, it can be compared against the JWST, CERN, Apollo and Artemis, ITER, SETI, the ISS, and others. If enough people think the goal is achievable and worth it for one reason or another, the project is a go.

 

[neil_w]

TThere is no confusion about this for those in the project, but perhaps among the public.

Exactly.

 

[bwayne64]

Why don't we have free energy already. I mean, Tony Stark did it all by himself in his basement laboratory.

Answer, " They're not Tony Stark " ,
; )

 

[kuririn]

Answer, " They're not Tony Stark " ,
; )

Or Macgyver.

 

[OverTheTop]

I'm surprised nobody has posted this; but:

It was posted by me in another thread discussing fusion. The search button is your friend .

I also commented that one of my research-grade UV/Vis/NIR spectrometers resides at the National Ignition Facility to inspect the optical components used in their terawatt lasers.

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

This is an interesting research step, but not quite the guarantee of a promising energy future some of the hype makes it out to be. As others mentioned, you can’t really claim a net positive just because the energy that came out of the pellet was more than the energy that went in, if it means you ignore the fact that the energy supplied the the lasers was hundreds of times the energy that went into the pellet. You still have a huge energy deficit in that case. So, it’s a research advance but not a practical engineering solution for power plants, which is ultimately what we want.

To be practical as a power source, I don’t think we are going to have a massive ignition facility with 192 intensely powerful lasers focusing on a tiny diamond pellet containing deuterium and tritium. It has to be much more simple than that. Ideally it would be something you could mount on your time machine car and power by feeding it rotten banana peels.

BTW, I live only a few miles from the Lawrence Livermore labs, and I’m always grateful when they don’t accidentally open a wormhole to the demon realm.

 

[Greg Furtman]

One more justification for Artemis.

Harrison Schmitt, Apollo 17 Astronaut and the only non-military Apollo astronaut, wrote a book that came out in 2006 about going back to the moon to extract He3. I attended an astronomy conference not long after where he was the Guest Speaker and he talked about this.

https://www.amazon.com/Return-Moon-Exploration-Enterprise-Settlement/dp/0387242856

 

[b.wieting]

A practical system would have fusion subsystem which liberates net energy (from a local human perspective, not violating conservation of energy). Plus a second subsystem to convert that energy into a useful form like electricity.
Sounds like the sun + solar cells

 

[kuririn]

Yes, successful fusion is difficult to achieve.

 

[b.wieting]

Yes, successful fusion is difficult to achieve.

Fusion under steady-state, absolutely. Fusion under transient conditions, difficult but mastered.

 

[bjphoenix]

How long have they been working on fusion? I remember when I was in college I knew that they had a reactor under one of the buildings that they had been working on since maybe the late 1960s.

 

[dhbarr]

Doesn't NIF prove out certain simulations ( D, T, Li ) about our aging nuke stockpile?

 

[techrat]

How long have they been working on fusion?

The Guy who invented TV was working on a fusion reactor in the 1950's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo_Farnsworth

 

[Antares JS]

How long have they been working on fusion?

Fusion reactors have been about 50 years away for about 50 years.

More seriously, I have to imagine scientists started thinking about controlled fusion pretty soon after the success of the H-bomb.

 

[bjphoenix]

Fusion reactors have been about 50 years away for about 50 years.

More seriously, I have to imagine scientists started thinking about controlled fusion pretty soon after the success of the H-bomb.

I had to look it up but there is a lot more reading here than I was willing to do right now. It says the one at University of Texas began 1971 but the concept dates back to the 1950s. It looks like a lot of locations were doing research, maybe that is normal for something like this. For something that has been worked on for over 70 years, maybe they need to go a different direction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak

 

[CalebJ]

Farnsworth was very involved in fusion development in what... late 50's?

 

[aerostadt]

I believe George Gamow, author of "One, Two, Three, ..., Infinity", stated somewhere that Stalin offered a treasure if he could successfully invent a fusion device. Gamow stated that he wisely turned down the offer, because he knew he would fail and be sent to Siberia.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4612-1512-7_51

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

Fusion is the energy of the future, and it always will be!

 

[Peartree]

I had to look it up but there is a lot more reading here than I was willing to do right now. It says the one at University of Texas began 1971 but the concept dates back to the 1950s. It looks like a lot of locations were doing research, maybe that is normal for something like this. For something that has been worked on for over 70 years, maybe they need to go a different direction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak

Fusion research is going in several directions. A few years ago the Tokamak direction was almost assumed to be dieing out, but then made several leaps forward. If I recall correctly, this milestone in power generation (though there's still obviously a long way to go) marks an improvement of several orders of magnitude in the last decade or two.

I remember not too long ago, photovoltaic cells were mocked as being so ridiculously inefficient that they'd bever be good/cost effective for anything but satellites. A few small leaps forward can change things in a big hurry.

 

[techrat]

I remember not too long ago, photovoltaic cells were mocked as being so ridiculously inefficient that they'd bever be good/cost effective for anything but satellites.

In the 1970's and 1980's, Electric Cars were slow, clunky, terrible, and had very limited range ( some as little as 30 miles). However, in the 90's two technologies evolved to make electric what it is now, and the first was inverter technology that allowed the cars to use more efficient A/C motors as opposed to the DC motors they had previously used. And the second jump was better and more energy dense battery chemistries. And now we've got Teslas absolutely spanking Dodge Chargers at the dragstrip.

 

[Greg Furtman]

Here's Neil deGrasse Tyson's take on the announcement this week.

 

[Blast it Tom!]

This is like the math that was done to calculate how Santa could deliver packages to Billions of Children all over the world in a single night, and basically he'd need to be travelling near light-speed, in which case he, this sleigh and the raindeer would burn up due to atmospheric heating.

Wait a minute... I just went back and read the thread... are you saying Santa doesn't bring my presents on Christmas Eve? Doesn't his magic protect him? I mean, if... no, it couldn't be. Please tell me it wasn't Mrs. Blast it, Tom all these years! Please?! It's only a week! I'm starting to cry!

 

[bwayne64]

Wait a minute... I just went back and read the thread... are you saying Santa doesn't bring my presents on Christmas Eve? Doesn't his magic protect him? I mean, if... no, it couldn't be. Please tell me it wasn't Mrs. Blast it, Tom all these years! Please?! It's only a week! I'm starting to cry!

I'll bet Santa has fusion power in the sleigh of his. Don't tell Rudolf, but the deer are just for show, ; )

 

[aerostadt]

This was on CBS "Sixty Minutes" yesterday. It is definitely worth watching.
https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/nuclear-fusion-60-minutes-2023-01-15/?intcid=CNM-00-10abd1h

 

[Greg Furtman]

Helion is approaching fusion from a different direction & I find it quite fascinating.

 

[Funkworks]

They did it again:

https://www.sciencealert.com/us-lab-achieves-fusion-ignition-in-repeat-of-breakthrough-experiment
I'm glad no one is contaminating this thread with their grudges about gvts and subsidies and incentives and so on. I hope it stays that way.