4 ms·

I get that fusion can theoretically transform vast quantities of stuff into useful energy. Can anyone comment on how scalable it would be if proven viable? Can

I get that fusion can theoretically transform vast quantities of stuff into useful energy. Can anyone comment on how scalable it would be if proven viable? Can it be built on a large scale profitably? Can it be built to serve remote locations off major grids? Can we ship it in reasonably sized space ships and use it to build bases elsewhere? Can we write off low energy costs to just churn on some sort of climate saving terraformer?

swebs 8y ago
>Can it be built to serve remote locations off major grids? No, fusion reactors are required to be a certain (very large) scale before they can provide a net output of energy. You can find kits online to build an actual fusion reactor in your garage, but it will consume more energy than it produces.
- pontifier 8y ago
  CURRENT fusion reactors are required to be very large scale... I've got a design that might scale down to the size of a D cell battery, or smaller. It's completely untested due to lack of funds, but on paper I haven't found enough flaws to count it out.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    So will you say what you plan to trigger the fusion with? And let's say you build one into a 1-liter box. How many watts should we expect it to produce?
scrumbledober 8y ago
Fusion scales incredibly well. For a given working reactor design, efficiency increases with size. I think viable working fusion would lead to a more interconnected grid because of this as opposed to smallscale fusion reactors being deployed in semi-remote areas. On the other hand truly difficult to reach places would be perfect for fusion as once it's built it takes very little fuel to run.
- pfdietz 8y ago
  Fusion reactor economics get worse as you make them bigger (assuming the smaller one works at all). That's because their power output is limited by what the first wall can withstand. By the square/cube law, their power/volume must decline as they are made larger.

swebs 8y ago

>Can it be built to serve remote locations off major grids? No, fusion reactors are required to be a certain (very large) scale before they can provide a net output of energy. You can find kits online to build an actual fusion reactor in your garage, but it will consume more energy than it produces.

pontifier 8y ago
CURRENT fusion reactors are required to be very large scale... I've got a design that might scale down to the size of a D cell battery, or smaller. It's completely untested due to lack of funds, but on paper I haven't found enough flaws to count it out.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  So will you say what you plan to trigger the fusion with? And let's say you build one into a 1-liter box. How many watts should we expect it to produce?

scrumbledober 8y ago

Fusion scales incredibly well. For a given working reactor design, efficiency increases with size. I think viable working fusion would lead to a more interconnected grid because of this as opposed to smallscale fusion reactors being deployed in semi-remote areas. On the other hand truly difficult to reach places would be perfect for fusion as once it's built it takes very little fuel to run.

pfdietz 8y ago
Fusion reactor economics get worse as you make them bigger (assuming the smaller one works at all). That's because their power output is limited by what the first wall can withstand. By the square/cube law, their power/volume must decline as they are made larger.