4 ms·
Another problem, apparently, is plasma disruptions [1]. They are more dramatic, can irreparably damage the vessel, and hard to solve or mitigate. ITER has a tas
by lambdadmitry 8y ago
Another problem, apparently, is plasma disruptions [1]. They are more dramatic, can irreparably damage the vessel, and hard to solve or mitigate. ITER has a taskforce dedicated to them [2], but it remains to be seen if that approach will work (and the energy will still be dumped into the first wall and support structure, albeit less local than with relativistic electrons).
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak#Plasma_disruptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak#Plasma_disruptions
[2]: https://www.iter.org/newsline/-/3183 https://www.iter.org/newsline/-/3183
- sandworm101 8y agoAnother approach to this is to not use solid walls. General Fusion (BC, Canada) is playing with the idea of a spherical plasma within a void of spinning liquid lead. The lack of solid walls makes for some very interesting options in terms of damage mitigation.
- lambdadmitry 8y agoThey already abandoned that idea AFAIK. Liquid lead wall introduced too much contamination into the plasma, making fusion impossible.
- pfdietz 8y agoMore specifically, they went to a scheme where liquid metal compressed the plasma more slowly against a solid inner column. The slowness was needed to keep the magnetic field below 100T, beyond which currents in the surface of the metal begin to vaporize it. But there are a host of other extremely challenging problems that pushes this idea to the "be very skeptical" column.