4 ms·

In fact there is something like a dozen groups working on prototypes to do fusion cheaper than ITER. Obviously, the people running ITER don't think that it can

by bdamm 7y ago

In fact there is something like a dozen groups working on prototypes to do fusion cheaper than ITER. Obviously, the people running ITER don't think that it can be done cheaper. The race is on! What I don't understand is why the WX-7 looks nothing like ITER. The people putting together WX-7 evidently thought that these convolutions were required, yet the ITER group does not. The race is not simple!

acqq 7y ago
WX-7: "purpose is to advance stellarator technology, though this experimental reactor will not produce electricity, it is used to evaluate the main components of a future fusion power plant" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X To compare, even ITER, international nuclear fusion research and engineering megaproject, initiated in 1988 (!) will also not produce any electrical energy: "ITER will not capture the energy it produces as electricity, but—as first of all fusion experiments in history to produce net energy gain—it will prepare the way for the machine that can." https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines The net energy "gained" in ITER experiment, if it achieves that much, will be just "vented to the atmosphere." The other experiments don't even expect to have any gain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER The smallest possible promise is, of course, that the money received "enables the Company to formally launch the program" as in the "news" here: https://generalfusion.com/2019/12/general-fusion-closes-65m-of-series-e-financing/ https://generalfusion.com/2019/12/general-fusion-closes-65m-...
simonh 7y ago
>The people putting together WX-7 evidently thought that these convolutions were required, yet the ITER group does not... They're just two different ways to solve the same problem. If you confine a plasma in a symmetric toroidal field, the difference in field strength between the inner and outer edges of the torus cause the electrons and protons in the field to separate. This causes a buildup of huge voltages in the plasma, causing a breakdown in the magnetic field. A stellarator fixes this by twisting the plasma loop into a figure 8 pattern that causes electrons and protons to twist and loop round the plasma path and roughly cancel out the voltages, not quite, but close. A tokamak confines the particles in a torroidal field, but winds the magnetic field lines round the torus in a helical pattern.
m0zg 7y ago
>> Obviously, the people running ITER don't think that it can be done cheaper That's actually not obvious at all. ITER project was started 12 years ago. By now it's very likely that there are ways to do it cheaper. But what do you do? Abandon the partially built ITER and start over? And what do you do if 5 years from now there are ways to build it cheaper still? So the government bureaucracies are marching on to complete it, which IMO is a sensible thing to do. But it doesn't mean it can't be done cheaper or more simply with 2020 technology.

by bdamm 7y ago

acqq 7y ago

WX-7: "purpose is to advance stellarator technology, though this experimental reactor will not produce electricity, it is used to evaluate the main components of a future fusion power plant" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X To compare, even ITER, international nuclear fusion research and engineering megaproject, initiated in 1988 (!) will also not produce any electrical energy: "ITER will not capture the energy it produces as electricity, but—as first of all fusion experiments in history to produce net energy gain—it will prepare the way for the machine that can." https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines The net energy "gained" in ITER experiment, if it achieves that much, will be just "vented to the atmosphere." The other experiments don't even expect to have any gain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER The smallest possible promise is, of course, that the money received "enables the Company to formally launch the program" as in the "news" here: https://generalfusion.com/2019/12/general-fusion-closes-65m-of-series-e-financing/ https://generalfusion.com/2019/12/general-fusion-closes-65m-...

simonh 7y ago

>The people putting together WX-7 evidently thought that these convolutions were required, yet the ITER group does not... They're just two different ways to solve the same problem. If you confine a plasma in a symmetric toroidal field, the difference in field strength between the inner and outer edges of the torus cause the electrons and protons in the field to separate. This causes a buildup of huge voltages in the plasma, causing a breakdown in the magnetic field. A stellarator fixes this by twisting the plasma loop into a figure 8 pattern that causes electrons and protons to twist and loop round the plasma path and roughly cancel out the voltages, not quite, but close. A tokamak confines the particles in a torroidal field, but winds the magnetic field lines round the torus in a helical pattern.

m0zg 7y ago

>> Obviously, the people running ITER don't think that it can be done cheaper That's actually not obvious at all. ITER project was started 12 years ago. By now it's very likely that there are ways to do it cheaper. But what do you do? Abandon the partially built ITER and start over? And what do you do if 5 years from now there are ways to build it cheaper still? So the government bureaucracies are marching on to complete it, which IMO is a sensible thing to do. But it doesn't mean it can't be done cheaper or more simply with 2020 technology.