18 ms·
Helion’s fusion power purchase agreement with Microsoft
- haarts 3y agoI love money flowing into these projects. More = better. Nothing is lost. WORST case scenario: some intelligent people will learn new stuff and get to know like minded people. Who knows what they will come up next!
- reacharavindh 3y agoSo, Microsoft is buying power generated from a Fusion plant that 1. doesnt exist today, and 2. is not even proven to be possible in practical terms(I mean net gain of power from a fusion plant). This kind of PR notice only serves to confuse people who care and fuel the idea that fusion could very well be vapourware. Why not just say "Microsoft commits some money for us to research if Fusion will be possible in ways we can think of"?
- trebligdivad 3y agoBecause it doesn't cost MS a bean until Helion have something working, but to Helion it means they can raise money for the actual construction of the first-production machine with the investors knowing someone will pay them for it if it works.
- gfodor 3y agoYou're making the mistake of thinking the person you were replying to was actually wondering why they would do this - and not just jumping to their own cynical conclusions (which they did before "asking" their question) and cathartically posting them here.
- aaronblohowiak 3y agoI agree with almost everything in your post, but the way you posted this also makes me recognize a feeling I had for too long, maybe it’s time to take a break and get a few deep breaths?
- gfodor 3y agoYes, we all get frustrated when we see nonsense online, but usually the best thing to do is “block and move on”
- lagniappe 3y agowhile not every comment deserves a reply, or your attention, silencing every opposing viewpoint is a great way to end up isolated and without contextual diversity.
- brookst 3y agoI read the comment as being about silencing low value noise from the knee jerk “this news doesn’t mean anything because companies bad news fake nothing to see here” crowd. If an opposing viewpoint doesn’t have any thoughtful, well reasoned proponents, maybe it’s not that interesting of a viewpoint?
- gfodor 3y agoI only recommend people blocking things that they can't handle. If you can't handle opposing viewpoints, that's a big problem, but telling you that you can solve that problem by forcing yourself to be exposed to them is mistaking the symptom for the disease. The cure for that isn't to read opposing opinions but to read arguments as to why emotional reactions to such things is not the path to a well examined life.
- reacharavindh 3y agoYes, I was cynical and frustrated from so much of PR fluff pieces that imply one thing only end up being smoke & mirrors. I did however genuinely ask “why not say it like it is?!” Sorry, I do not subscribe to the idea that everybody should just ignore and move on when they see nonsense.. If nobody cares, then what is the point of our collective existence as a society? As an exaggerated example, if we all stopped caring whether a business claiming to do something can actually do it or not, doesn’t it incentivise every business to just lie and deceive as their way of business? Is that the world we should be looking forward to?
- paganel 3y agoThere’s no room for non-cynicism, i.e. for idealism, when money is involved. And money is definitely involved in this.
- aww_dang 3y agoIs engaging with good faith a mistake? It seems less perilous than mind-reading. I found the reply informative.
- gfodor 3y agoNo, engaging with good faith isn't a mistake, but the person you were replying to admitted in the sentence before their question that they already had decided what the answer was. This is a common communication pattern I try avoiding engagement with since it's set up to sound like a person is asking a question when they're actually making a statement. (Though agreed that it's not always a fruitless effort.)
- shafyy 3y ago> [...] knowing someone will pay them for it if it works. I doubt that if somebody can get fusion to work at a competitive price, scale, stability etc. that they would lack buyers.
- megaman821 3y agoI would assume they can't make it work at a competitive price (yet?), but it is technology Microsoft wants to see come to fruition. So if they make it work Microsoft will pay them 2-3x the market value for electricity.
- HDThoreaun 3y agoElectricity is a commodity. How could they possibly have a working product that they can’t sell? Just hook it up to the grid and there you go.
- XorNot 3y agoNuclear fission works right now but is frequently too expensive per megawatt-hour to build. There's no real reason fusion couldn't end up the same way.
- pfdietz 3y agoAnd realize this also depends on how much the competition costs. If renewables and storage continue to get cheaper, fusion that "works" in an economic sense could transition back to "doesn't work". It's the fate of most technologies to fail this way, so it shouldn't be surprising (or a source of dishonor) if the same thing happens to fusion. That doesn't mean money spent developing fusion is necessarily wasted; the size of the energy market -- a quadrillion dollars or so over the 21st century -- justifies longshot investments.
- DennisP 3y agoBear in mind that Helion's reactor is 50MW, about the size of three large wind turbines. If it works they'll be mass-producing them in factories and shipping them by rail, and they'll have a declining cost curve just like anything else.
- pfdietz 3y agoI am cautiously optimistic about Helion. IMO, they're the fusion team that has the best chance of reaching the economic finish line.
- DennisP 3y agoThat's true for fusion in general, but all the aneutronic designs look especially cheap to build, Helion's included.
- gpm 3y ago> Because it doesn't cost MS a bean until Helion have something working I doubt that (unless you have some source for it which I missed, in which case sorry). It seems really unlikely that Helion would commit to a contract with penalty clauses if they didn't get money before they got fusion working. Once (if) they have commercial fusion working they're golden, it will be trivial to raise money on excellent terms, and as such they won't need income from this contract. If this contract only gave them money at that point it wouldn't be worth very much to them. If the contract gave them money now though... well right now it's hard to raise money. Taking a loan out could make sense. Getting the option to repay that loan by providing services could make sense. And what is a contract where you get paid now on the condition that you pay back more at the end (either in dollars in energy) if not a loan? Besides, it's a loan which serves as great PR for both companies.
- trebligdivad 3y agoFair; but I think their problem is that they'd like to get money to start to build the production reactor before they've demoed they have it working - of course that's risky as hell. But if they're right, and can start going the basic building and construction on the next phase while finishing the current phase it chops a couple of years off. But being risky as hell anyone sane would be more worried about making a loan or investment - so some encouragement in the opposite direction from a customer would help them get that loan.
- HarHarVeryFunny 3y agoThere seem to have been very few details released so far as to the exact nature of the agreement between Helion and Microsoft, but I think it's almost guaranteed to include an investment in Helion by Microsoft (maybe a series of investments based on meeting development milestones?), in addition to eventual power purchase agreement. Helion gets continued funding from Microsoft (maybe increasingly expensive at this stage as they scale the tech up and operationalize it). Microsoft gets good PR, a likely profitable investment, and eventually cheap electricity as a bonus. I believe Sam Altman has most of his personal net worth (to tune of few hundred million) invested in Helion, and no doubt brokered this deal, so it can also be seen as a doubling-down by Microsoft of their relationship with and commitment to OpenAI/Altman.
- throwawaysleep 3y ago> with the investors knowing someone will pay them for it if it works. Given that there is substantial demand for electricity, why would this be a concern?
- capybara_2020 3y agoDon't a lot of companies invest/tie up with potentially upcoming companies/technologies? Wasn't OpenAI one of those investments? That investment seems to have paid off.
- JumpinJack_Cash 3y ago> > fuel the idea that fusion could very well be vapourware But it's exactly the real scenario at play. However Microsoft is calling dibs on the energy that will be generated if fusion turns out to be not vaporware
- aresant 3y agoSome context - Helion was funded by YC early and more recent rounds were led by Sam Altman personally https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/05/helion-series-e/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9lbi5tLndpa2lwZWRpYS5vcmcv&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMGKaezQ-6zpgAhpmL7eVKQ9_C41-NGh4h809Thg1yxE9dc34YaIiClchCdhW9aOQKbKYl7P4LJwQgFN_weoJxOAN90fzYOWHi2WvjOTUCA_GVlFgYU-jBZXchlsBaiwazes4ax7NDD1gAvJZE80GwkMaJrj3RKlTWclKzR6M3b7 https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/05/helion-series-e/?guccounte...
- Kelteseth 3y agoSo at this stage, what market did Microsoft not yet enter via a billion dollar takeover or funding (I have not read the article, did not load for me)
- deelowe 3y agoThis isn't a take over. It's a purchasing agreement.
- HarHarVeryFunny 3y agoProbably a bit of each, and more... Not a take over, but likely an investment (or planned series of investments) in Helion by Microsoft that'll give them an ownership stake and help fund Helion's continued development up to and including the pilot plant whose output Microsoft will be buying. Quite similar to Microsoft's investment in OpenAI... investor + customer + good P-R.
- moh_maya 3y agoFrom [0] ‘ This is a binding agreement that has financial penalties if we can’t build a fusion system,” Helion founder and CEO David Kirtley tells The Verge. “We’ve committed to be able to build a system and sell it commercially to [Microsoft].” Assuming the financial penalties are a significant fraction (i.e they are, say, greater than 5%) of the agreement value, I would interpret it as a more serious / confident commitment and expression of intent and viability, than just a contract that’s hope + way to support. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/10/23717332/microsoft-nuclear-fusion-power-plant-helion-purchase-agreement https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/10/23717332/microsoft-nuclea...
- roywiggins 3y agoIf they can't build a fusion system, aren't they sort of bust anyway?
- tigerlily 3y agoAnyone know if their machine config can scale to do hydrogen-boron fusion at a later stage?
- pfdietz 3y agoNo, I don't believe that works.
- tigerlily 3y agoI took a brief dive, and have to admit that I think your conclusion was right.
- pfdietz 3y agop-11B fusion is really hard. Fortunately, the folks at Helion have found ways to greatly reduce the DT neutron production in their reactors. They still will have neutrons from DD reactions, but those neutrons are much less damaging due to their lower energy.
- politician 3y agoSo, assuming this pans out, would this require Helion to deliver the power to Microsoft off grid? I guess my question is 'what regulatory oversight is typically required in these sorts of situations?'
- schlauerfox 3y agoIn the USA, it's likely the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Their site says "The Commission as a collegial body formulates policies, develops regulations governing nuclear reactor and nuclear material safety, issues orders to licensees, and adjudicates legal matters." https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/20/nuclear-fusion-will-not-be-regulated-the-same-way-nuclear-fission-is.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/20/nuclear-fusion-will-not-be-r... Depending on how early in development it is, it would likely be grid tied at some point because of the huge power needs to drive the power generating reactor before it gets going and the fuel generation reactor which is not energy producing.
- Bedon292 3y agoI believe agreements like this typically have the power go to the grid. The electricity they consume still comes from the grid wherever their needs are, and the electricity being produced by Helion would go to wherever the grid needs it. They would be paying extra for the production of the energy, and then count it as offsetting their consumption. I am not totally fond of how that seems to work out, as they are offsetting production elsewhere, and the grid there could already be cleaner than where they are consuming. But perhaps somewhere along the way things like that are accounted for?
- mola 3y agoSounds like Altman used his personal relationship with Microsoft CEO to do this meaningless PR stunt, so he can more easily pursaude stupid money to actually invest in this.
- M2Ys4U 3y agoWelcome to venture capitalism.
- thepasswordis 3y agoWhat the hell is this cynicism? Seems completely inappropriate. Helion isn’t vaporware.
- next_xibalba 3y agoWhile you’re probably right about GP’s cynical tone, this announcement does seem fairly meaningless. Does Helion have a working prototype that can be reasonably moved into production? Or is that still years away?
- aetherson 3y agoHelion in 2014: We're about 3 years away from break-even energy. https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-VCDB-15246 https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-VCDB-15246
- DennisP 3y agoThey didn't get the funding they needed until 2021. https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/05/helion-series-e/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/05/helion-series-e/
- DennisP 3y agoTheir sixth reactor achieved 100M degree temps, ran for 16 months under vacuum, did thousands of fusion shots, and demonstrated D-He3 fusion. Their seventh will start up in 2024, and is supposed to demonstrate net electricity from D-He3. Their eighth is supposed to be the commercial reactor. If they don't achieve that, they will have to pay penalties to Microsoft.
- pinewurst 3y agoWhat's next, a press release about a new Azure datacenter on Proxima Centauri B, powered of course by Helion?
- Tenemo 3y agoReal Engineering did a great video on this company and their approach, specifically: https://youtu.be/_bDXXWQxK38 https://youtu.be/_bDXXWQxK38
- jnsaff2 3y agoAlso a rebuttal to this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vUPhsFoniw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vUPhsFoniw
- izend 3y agoThanks great video describing the neutron production issues and the cross-section issues of their fuel choice.
- foobarian 3y agoThis critique seems very reasonable and accessible. So I'm puzzled how the caliber of people like mentioned in the article, who are technologists and familiar with physics, can get on board with the kind of investments they are getting. What do they know that we don't? At least in the case of Theranos the investors were not technical.
- sebzim4500 3y agoThe guy did a much longer Q&A livestream afterwards and he did slightly roll back his critique. He admitted there were some advantages of Helion's approach even if he still doesn't think it is overrall the best way forwards.
- jnsaff2 3y agoThe Q&A mentioned is likely this [0]. Do you have any hints which section would cover the upsides? [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK5v1Nw98xs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK5v1Nw98xs
- Tenemo 3y agoThanks for the link! The rebuttal sounds very reasonable. I doubt the Real Engineering guy has much expertise in that area and just mostly went for the views and fusion hype.
- RivieraKid 3y agoI think Helion has a 50% chance of achieving net electricity next year. When hearing about fusion research, the vast majority of people immediately react with something like "fusion is always 30 years away lol". There's a good chance they will be very surprised.
- imdsm 3y agoI hope so. There is so much money spent on technology that is meaningless, so much pessimism over technology that could actually help us. I hope to see people as shocked by fusion as they are by LLMs.
- vsareto 3y agoIt's probably a net benefit to be pessimistic about world-changing technologies you hear about in the press until they're proven and operating. Being endlessly disappointed is draining. Not to mention getting scammed sucks.
- sebzim4500 3y agoRealistically, HN would still find a reason to be miserable.
- nindalf 3y agoMirror - https://archive.is/85FPd https://archive.is/85FPd
- thepasswordis 3y agoHN, what the heck has happened to you? What is with all of these cynical comments? Helion is an awesome company, their technology is real, and this is cool. >oh no this might not work! Do you guys not understand that you’re posting on the forum of a venture capital firm/startup accelerator?
- deweller 3y ago8 years ago, HN was a place full of optimism and excitement. I've noticed a marked increase in cynicism in this place. Like most of the world, it suffers from extreme tribalism and group think. I miss the former positive HN. And the positive world. sigh
- throwawaysleep 3y ago> And the positive world. sigh It turned out to be a lie and a scam, so now people are more skeptical.
- Gud 3y agoNo it didn’t. The world is an amazing place. I am thankful to be alive.
- throw9away6 3y agoMust be nice to be a 1% er
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Gud 3y agoI'm not rich, I'm broke af. Doesn't stop me from choosing happiness. What's the alternative? Spend my life in misery? I tried that for a decade, didn't work out well for me. Now I choose to be happy. I choose to be the best I can be. Moping around sure as shit didn't fix my problems
- kryptn 3y agoThis is pretty exciting honestly, I hope it works out!
- neom 3y agoIf you wanna learn more about Helion, two good videos: One positive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bDXXWQxK38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bDXXWQxK38 One critical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vUPhsFoniw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vUPhsFoniw
- fnordpiglet 3y agoIf they can’t change their favicon, I’m not convinced they’ll deliver commercial fusion power.
- bmitc 3y agoDoes anyone have some thoughts on whether fusion will actually help fight climate change? Of course, fusion is far more clean than coal or gas and less environmentally destructive, aside from the mining of materials required, than say hydro power plants. But from what I can tell, the primary contributor to damaging the climate and environment is consumption, as a process. I currently see no end result where fusion does not drastically increase consumption, which means more use of non-clean materials and processes. So I guess the question is: will the benefits of fusion offset the increase in consumption?
- sebzim4500 3y agoI don't understand your argument at all. In a world where people can produce power through fusion cheaper than they can through coal or oil, why would use of non-clean materials increase?
- anonuser123456 3y agoThe price of oil+nat gas will fall as alternative forms of energy come online. But when the price falls, consumption goes up (demand elasticity).
- alexb_ 3y agoIf the logic works in this direction, it works in the other direction too - are you saying we should shut down renewable energy so that the price of energy goes up and consumption of it goes down accordingly?
- anonuser123456 3y ago>are you saying we should shut down renewable energy so that the price of energy goes up and consumption of it goes down accordingly? No. I’m suggesting that once a cost competitive alternative exists at scale for hydrocarbons, we institute Pigouvian taxes (e.g. carbon taxes). This ensures that at the margin, people are incentivized to choose low/zero carbon energy sources.
- simonebrunozzi 3y agoReminds me of a similarly vague "statement" made by BOOM supersonic, another YC company. [0] Here's an excerpt: United will purchase 15 of Boom’s ‘Overture’ airliners, once Overture meets United’s demanding safety, operating and sustainability requirements, with an option for 35 more aircraft. Slated to carry passengers in 2029, the net-zero carbon aircraft will fly on 100% sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). Let me tell you where the problem is. If there is no PENALTY for United or Microsoft to get out of the deal, and/or no upfront payment, it's simply a completely empty statement. Let me give you an example. Here, on HN, today, I solemnly declare that I am available to sign a deal with Helion to purchase 50 MW of power generation, for 10 years, generated by their 1st power plant, starting in 2028. We can pre agree on the price, yes. Let's say $40 per MWh [1]. This is 50 MW * 24 * 365 = 438,000 MWh / year, or ~$16M/year. (correct me if this math is completely wrong). Fantastic! Oh, by the way: nothing will happen to me if I walk away from this deal. I am not giving any upfront payment. Nothing. Just my word. See you in 2028. Or not. p.s. happy to be proven wrong, if Microsoft of Helion (or Boom) are kind enough to provide more details about this "agreement". Besides this, I wish them all the best. Just don't try to sell me this PR BS, please. [0]: https://boomsupersonic.com/united https://boomsupersonic.com/united [1]: https://www.nuenergen.com/solutions/smart-grid/price-point https://www.nuenergen.com/solutions/smart-grid/price-point
- baking 3y ago"While the agreement carries a risk to Helion, it also unlocks essential benefits, Kirtley said." It probably has something to do with co-location at a Microsoft Azure data center, several of which or being permitted or under construction in Washington State.
- pfdietz 3y agoBoom had the problem that no jet engine maker ended up wanting to make an engine they could use. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzyOIwjYK7E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzyOIwjYK7E
- slaw 3y agoThat is not new problem. Airbus couldn't get modern jet engines for it's A380 and it was cancelled.
- mjfl 3y agowhy would Helion architecture be better than a stellarator approach?
- lonelyasacloud 3y agoA company that relies on massive amounts of increasingly expensive electricity to make enormous profits. Agrees to pay another company likely over the odds for early - and no details, but quite likely exclusive access and with Azure compute as part of deal (a la OpenAI)) - for the small amount of electricity that may or may not be initially generated by the other company's technology. Then when/if technology is successful, as it scales up they get to fill their boots with effectively limitless Carbon-free electricity at progressively orders of magnitude lower cost than their competitors have access to. Worst case - a nice bit of PR for Fusion, Helion and MS. Best case - in a few years provides funds to help Helion rapidly scale up, MS - assuming exclusivity - with increasingly low-cost climate-friendly electricity for their data centres that their competitors cannot access. Carbon capture becomes something other than an oil industry excuse, and the human race's bacon is saved.