24 ms·

ITER isn't meant to be a practical design, it's for research. So it's not obsolete just because it's using inefficient magnets.

avmich 6y ago
It could be argued that ITER is actually quite important in learning how to deal with high technical complexity in general. Probably a good reason by itself to keep working on ITER, ISS is way simpler in comparison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER#Criticism "The project however was significantly delayed at the design stage as result of purposeful decision to decentralize its design and manufacturing among 35 participating states, which resulted in complexity that was unprecedented but consistent with the initial ITER goals of creating knowledge and expertise rather than merely producing energy."
- mlindner 6y ago
  In other words, ITER is a jobs project.
  - knowaveragejoe 6y ago
    You make it sound like it's a handout and a bad thing. IMO jobs facilitating knowledge, experience & wisdom transfer between so many countries is worthwhile on its own, nevermind that the goal is to help solve our energy problems. If we get experience developing a massive international moonshot program from a jobs program, so be it.
  - baq 6y ago
    jobs == domain knowledge
Someone 6y ago
The article claims this design can easily be built before ITER is completed (5 years vs 15 years) It also says it can be built much cheaper than the total cost for ITER. The article doesn’t say it, but I would guess that it also can be built for less money than the money needed to complete ITER. If so, what’s not obsolete about ITER? Are there useful experiments that can be done with it that one can’t do with a more modern design?
- willis936 6y ago
  ITER is much more complicated than SPARC. For example, the disruption mitigation system is similar to DIII-D's but with (I believe) much higher resolution in time and space. ITER has 80 MW of plasma heating but most Q targets only require ~50 MW. It is a platform to do science. It's a huge machine that is meant to demonstrate a tokamak reactor. Corners can't be cut to get there. Making a tiny machine quickly, skimming over the hard engineering problems is more of a moonshot approach. It's halfway to a startup with actual MIT startups selling HTS coils. Be wary of anyone selling something.

avmich 6y ago

It could be argued that ITER is actually quite important in learning how to deal with high technical complexity in general. Probably a good reason by itself to keep working on ITER, ISS is way simpler in comparison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER#Criticism "The project however was significantly delayed at the design stage as result of purposeful decision to decentralize its design and manufacturing among 35 participating states, which resulted in complexity that was unprecedented but consistent with the initial ITER goals of creating knowledge and expertise rather than merely producing energy."

mlindner 6y ago
In other words, ITER is a jobs project.
- knowaveragejoe 6y ago
  You make it sound like it's a handout and a bad thing. IMO jobs facilitating knowledge, experience & wisdom transfer between so many countries is worthwhile on its own, nevermind that the goal is to help solve our energy problems. If we get experience developing a massive international moonshot program from a jobs program, so be it.
- baq 6y ago
  jobs == domain knowledge

Someone 6y ago

The article claims this design can easily be built before ITER is completed (5 years vs 15 years) It also says it can be built much cheaper than the total cost for ITER. The article doesn’t say it, but I would guess that it also can be built for less money than the money needed to complete ITER. If so, what’s not obsolete about ITER? Are there useful experiments that can be done with it that one can’t do with a more modern design?

willis936 6y ago
ITER is much more complicated than SPARC. For example, the disruption mitigation system is similar to DIII-D's but with (I believe) much higher resolution in time and space. ITER has 80 MW of plasma heating but most Q targets only require ~50 MW. It is a platform to do science. It's a huge machine that is meant to demonstrate a tokamak reactor. Corners can't be cut to get there. Making a tiny machine quickly, skimming over the hard engineering problems is more of a moonshot approach. It's halfway to a startup with actual MIT startups selling HTS coils. Be wary of anyone selling something.