4 ms·

Where are we at with nuclear fusion? At this time, the only promising progress I know of is happening at Lockheed Martin's Skunkworks[1] where they are develop

Where are we at with nuclear fusion? At this time, the only promising progress I know of is happening at Lockheed Martin's Skunkworks[1] where they are developing a truck-sized 100 MW [corrected from Mhz] power plant in an incremental, iterative fashion and claiming to have something operational by 2020. As regards solar and other "clean" alternatives, there exists vast potential for reducing daytime electric grid load by throwing a few panels on residential and office rooftops. Why don't more people do it? As the cost of panels plummets, the payoff time is decreasing and ROI over time is increasing. A whole industry of solar panel leasing has sprung up, whereby residential home owners let an installer put in the panels for free, then pay a discounted electric rate. Not exactly like going off-grid, but it does have the same effect of reducing demand for coal/oil/gas generated power. I'm envisioning future new home developments where every house comes with solar pre-installed. No decisions to make; the cost is baked in (so to speak) and you get a home that will incur minimal electric bills. I don't see a government role in all of these initiatives, which are market driven. People want green energy these days; it's become a fad. Almost gone are the days when homeowners associations sue a member for putting "ugly" solar panels on his roof. 1. http://www.eweek.com/news/lockheed-martin-claims-sustainable-fusion-is-within-its-grasp.html http://www.eweek.com/news/lockheed-martin-claims-sustainable...

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
jessriedel 11y ago
All things considered, ITER is much more likely to lead to commercial fusion.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- blisterpeanuts 11y ago
  Even if all they do is solve some of the problems with magnetic bottles, which apparently is the primary focus of their current research, then that would be most helpful toward future implementations. As I understand it, another problem is how to inject energy beams through the bottle to keep the reaction going -- i.e., high powered laser. Another issue is how to contain the neutrons which bombard the physical container, rendering it dangerously radioactive after a while. Maybe the bottle prevents this? I don't know enough about it. By comparison, solar is so much simpler, though eventually we'll probably need both paradigms. It seems silly to power residential homes from a central location when they can get most of their own power from rooftop collectors, but we'll always need central power generation for some purposes such as solar-poor regions, as well as mobile applications like sea transport and eventually space transport.
- jacquesm 11y ago
  If it works at all that would be a breakthrough of truly epic proportions. So I'd be more than fine with that.
Simorgh 11y ago
ITER (located in France) will build a fusion device to produce net energy, in the next few years - 50MW input and 500 MW output. The project has about €13 Billion investment committed. Perhaps we're on the edge of a new energy area. https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines
- riffraff 11y ago
  but what does "in the next few years" really mean? As per their own site, by june 2016 they should at most decide a date for when the first plasma will be _scheduled_ to happen. Also, there are probably still decades between a working ITER and commercial reactors.
pdkl95 11y ago
Fusion will change everything if we can actually make it work for our general power generation needs. Unfortunately, it's one of those technologies that is always going to arrive "soon". I fully support investment in fusion research (and pure-research in general), but the reality is we can't wait for technologies that are still technically vaporware. Solar and wind are in the same situation. I expect we will be able to make much more efficient solar generation technologies and find a way to store power at the TWh scale. When we have reached those goals, we can re-evaluate, but right now waiting means choosing to use more coal/oil/gas. > ... solar ... reducing demand for coal/oil/gas ... Unfortunately, that's not always the case when solar ends up using a "natural gas backup" to solve the reliability problem.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

jessriedel 11y ago

All things considered, ITER is much more likely to lead to commercial fusion.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

blisterpeanuts 11y ago
Even if all they do is solve some of the problems with magnetic bottles, which apparently is the primary focus of their current research, then that would be most helpful toward future implementations. As I understand it, another problem is how to inject energy beams through the bottle to keep the reaction going -- i.e., high powered laser. Another issue is how to contain the neutrons which bombard the physical container, rendering it dangerously radioactive after a while. Maybe the bottle prevents this? I don't know enough about it. By comparison, solar is so much simpler, though eventually we'll probably need both paradigms. It seems silly to power residential homes from a central location when they can get most of their own power from rooftop collectors, but we'll always need central power generation for some purposes such as solar-poor regions, as well as mobile applications like sea transport and eventually space transport.
jacquesm 11y ago
If it works at all that would be a breakthrough of truly epic proportions. So I'd be more than fine with that.

Simorgh 11y ago

ITER (located in France) will build a fusion device to produce net energy, in the next few years - 50MW input and 500 MW output. The project has about €13 Billion investment committed. Perhaps we're on the edge of a new energy area. https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines

riffraff 11y ago
but what does "in the next few years" really mean? As per their own site, by june 2016 they should at most decide a date for when the first plasma will be _scheduled_ to happen. Also, there are probably still decades between a working ITER and commercial reactors.

pdkl95 11y ago

Fusion will change everything if we can actually make it work for our general power generation needs. Unfortunately, it's one of those technologies that is always going to arrive "soon". I fully support investment in fusion research (and pure-research in general), but the reality is we can't wait for technologies that are still technically vaporware. Solar and wind are in the same situation. I expect we will be able to make much more efficient solar generation technologies and find a way to store power at the TWh scale. When we have reached those goals, we can re-evaluate, but right now waiting means choosing to use more coal/oil/gas. > ... solar ... reducing demand for coal/oil/gas ... Unfortunately, that's not always the case when solar ends up using a "natural gas backup" to solve the reliability problem.