2 ms·
Great, explanation like that should be associated to majority of their articles. Sounds like a great thing so good luck to them! Thanks for explanation!
by funkyy 11y ago
Great, explanation like that should be associated to majority of their articles. Sounds like a great thing so good luck to them!
Thanks for explanation!
- brian-armstrong 11y agoThis is likely because they have a science bias, not a product bias. This particular team and design will never produce more energy than it will consume. It's specifically made to validate some ideas about reactor design. Fusion reactors become more energy efficient as you scale them up, but also more expensive. As a result, all such designs have to be vetted through a series of cheaper but "nonfunctional" designs. It would be hard for them to extoll all the virtues of this without knowing if this design can work. One possible outcome from this test is that the reactor design, the stellerator, is not presently feasible for power plant design. That would be disappointing but at least they would have paid relatively less to figure that out.