3 ms·
Even if we assume for a moment that we got it working, the factors are: scale and embrittlement. Current thermonuclear technology, theoretically, breaks even, e
by mynegation 9y ago
Even if we assume for a moment that we got it working, the factors are: scale and embrittlement. Current thermonuclear technology, theoretically, breaks even, energywise, on reactors of certain scale. There is a reason to believe that once we build a reactor of a certain size, the energy output of a reaction will be bigger than the energy spent on jumpstarting it and magnetic containtainment. embrittlement of reactor structural materials is caused by radiation. After a while, reactor has to be rebuilt from totally new materials.
- GCU-Empiricist 9y ago>After a while, reactor has to be rebuilt from totally new materials. The closest parallel we have is nuclear reactors. Navy Nuclear submarines are probably the most prevalent safe small reactors (US submarine reactors not K19) and they have significant lifespans extending across multiple decades. (source: passed my navy nuclear engineer exam in a past career) The resulting embrittled can/containment does need to be handled safely, but this is a capital depreciation that can be modeled and planned for.
- DennisP 9y agoThe MIT design essentially solves those two issues. Scale is smaller with stronger magnetic fields, and embrittlement is confined to an inner wall which is easily replaced once a year.
- theothermkn 9y agoYou are correct! It’s maddening that you had to make the correction, though. Commenters in here seem incurious about the new developments detailed in the source material.