5 ms·

This is yet another area where high temperature superconductors revolutionizes its engineering. I can't wait for more insights to be made in this domain: the wa

This is yet another area where high temperature superconductors revolutionizes its engineering. I can't wait for more insights to be made in this domain: the way superconductors behave is actually becoming clearer and clearer from one year to another. Ambient temperature superconductors are the holy grail of the field, of course, but this project shows that even ~80 K superconductors can substantially reduce the size of magnets (cooling apparatus included), which can open doors to new applications. Exciting times... Oh, and I can't wait for ITER either. While the project was never meant to be commercially viable, it should offer some great insights into commercial fusion energy.

mannykannot 9y ago
I cannot help but think that ITER has been a harmful mistake. With at least 17 years to go before it is operational, it already seems obsolescent in some key technological areas, such as magnets, yet it keeps on going, sucking up funds that might be better applied elsewhere (though whether they would be is an open question.) The project reminds me of Britain's attempt to build the airliner of the future in the Bristol Brabazon [1], but which was obsolete by the time it flew. The biggest cost was probably in lost time. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Brabazon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Brabazon
- jmiserez 9y ago
  Your 17 years are off, experiment begin is in 2027: https://www.iter.org/construction/timeline https://www.iter.org/construction/timeline And even then, the time until “operational” is not spent idling, the project has sparked and funded lots of research in various domains. It’s like the space race, at some point you just have to start building something for there to be any actual progress.
  - mannykannot 9y ago
    Indeed, but I wonder if ITER has had a chilling effect on other such projects that could take advantage of newer technology to leapfrog it. In fact, some of the recent projects are looking more like the space race, which is an encouraging sign, and perhaps especially if it lights a fire under ITER - let's have a fusion race! The article cited 2035 as the date when ITER is expected to begin producing fusion energy. While preliminary R&D is necessary, it is all for (nearly) nothing unless and until it results in fusion at a scale that advances the state of the art.
- Erlangolem 9y ago
  ITER is a political tool, not a scientific one. The real cutting edge fusion research is being done at some small private companies trying to make aneutronic fusion work, and from places like MIT. If we’re ever going to break the endless cycle of “in 50 years” it will not be a result of ITER.
  - MayeulC 9y ago
    ITER has some real engineering value, though. A lot of it is figuring out the missing pieces about logistics, control apparatus, material behaviour, the technologies that are actually practical to implement, and various requirements that have not necessarily been foreseen before construction. A lot of that can probably explain the various construction delays that happened over the course of its construction, and it probably explains in part why this articles states that it is complementary to ITER. A big part of those insights will be had before it starts operating, so I wouldn't rule out its contribution to a hypothetical sub-2050 commercial fusion industry. Edit: and it probably has some scientific value as well, but not being a fusion expert, I can't comment on this.
    - Erlangolem 9y ago
      ITER isn’t really a source of breakthroughs in necessary materials; it didn’t develop new superconductors, hasn’t solved the fusion blanket problem, it won’t be breakeven, Stellerators already are superior in terms of containment, and ITER’a fusion vessel is still intolerant of sputtering. The delays are famously a result of so many countries vying for contracts, and the result is a high performance machine built by committee. It doesn’t even attempt to generate “new insights” it’s just a bad, old idea at scale.
- adrianN 9y ago
  A lot of the technology used in practice is very out of date. Engineers usually call this proven and reliable.
  - mannykannot 9y ago
    Today's proven and reliable technology can't do fusion yet - that's the whole point of these projects.
- api 9y ago
  ITER reminds me of the Space Shuttle, the Joint Strike Fighter, and (to give a private sector example) Intel Itanium. Large bureaucracies seem prone to fixation on huge omnibus money sponge projects that "everyone can get behind" but that starve out everything else. The fact that these projects are so big tends to make them slow and not very innovative.

mannykannot 9y ago

I cannot help but think that ITER has been a harmful mistake. With at least 17 years to go before it is operational, it already seems obsolescent in some key technological areas, such as magnets, yet it keeps on going, sucking up funds that might be better applied elsewhere (though whether they would be is an open question.) The project reminds me of Britain's attempt to build the airliner of the future in the Bristol Brabazon [1], but which was obsolete by the time it flew. The biggest cost was probably in lost time. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Brabazon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Brabazon

jmiserez 9y ago
Your 17 years are off, experiment begin is in 2027: https://www.iter.org/construction/timeline https://www.iter.org/construction/timeline And even then, the time until “operational” is not spent idling, the project has sparked and funded lots of research in various domains. It’s like the space race, at some point you just have to start building something for there to be any actual progress.
- mannykannot 9y ago
  Indeed, but I wonder if ITER has had a chilling effect on other such projects that could take advantage of newer technology to leapfrog it. In fact, some of the recent projects are looking more like the space race, which is an encouraging sign, and perhaps especially if it lights a fire under ITER - let's have a fusion race! The article cited 2035 as the date when ITER is expected to begin producing fusion energy. While preliminary R&D is necessary, it is all for (nearly) nothing unless and until it results in fusion at a scale that advances the state of the art.
Erlangolem 9y ago
ITER is a political tool, not a scientific one. The real cutting edge fusion research is being done at some small private companies trying to make aneutronic fusion work, and from places like MIT. If we’re ever going to break the endless cycle of “in 50 years” it will not be a result of ITER.
- MayeulC 9y ago
  ITER has some real engineering value, though. A lot of it is figuring out the missing pieces about logistics, control apparatus, material behaviour, the technologies that are actually practical to implement, and various requirements that have not necessarily been foreseen before construction. A lot of that can probably explain the various construction delays that happened over the course of its construction, and it probably explains in part why this articles states that it is complementary to ITER. A big part of those insights will be had before it starts operating, so I wouldn't rule out its contribution to a hypothetical sub-2050 commercial fusion industry. Edit: and it probably has some scientific value as well, but not being a fusion expert, I can't comment on this.
  - Erlangolem 9y ago
    ITER isn’t really a source of breakthroughs in necessary materials; it didn’t develop new superconductors, hasn’t solved the fusion blanket problem, it won’t be breakeven, Stellerators already are superior in terms of containment, and ITER’a fusion vessel is still intolerant of sputtering. The delays are famously a result of so many countries vying for contracts, and the result is a high performance machine built by committee. It doesn’t even attempt to generate “new insights” it’s just a bad, old idea at scale.
adrianN 9y ago
A lot of the technology used in practice is very out of date. Engineers usually call this proven and reliable.
- mannykannot 9y ago
  Today's proven and reliable technology can't do fusion yet - that's the whole point of these projects.
api 9y ago
ITER reminds me of the Space Shuttle, the Joint Strike Fighter, and (to give a private sector example) Intel Itanium. Large bureaucracies seem prone to fixation on huge omnibus money sponge projects that "everyone can get behind" but that starve out everything else. The fact that these projects are so big tends to make them slow and not very innovative.