Major Milestone Reached in race for Fusion

[Flagg]

CNN.com: Laser bombardment yields energy milestone

I'm on my iPad and am verboten from being on my PC right now due to my fucked up toe needing to be elevated so apologies for not posting the article. But if someone else would it would be much appreciated.

[Oskuro]

The event was over in a fraction of a scintilla of a blink of an eye and released a burst of energy that's not particularly impressive by most standards.

But it's being hailed as a milestone in a decades-long quest to harness the power of nuclear fusion, the same process that powers the sun. For the first time, scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California say they produced more energy from a reaction in their fuel source than they put into the fuel, said Omar Hurricane, the physicist who led the experiment.

"You're not going to power a car with it. You're not going to power a house with it," Hurricane told CNN. "It'll be a while before we address all the needed scientific challenges and then the engineering challenges to make it more practical, but we're excited. It's a great step forward scientifically."

There is a bit of fine print. The implosion of a tiny pellet holding two hydrogen isotopes did produce more energy than it took to cause it -- about 17,000 joules, which Hurricane compared to the force of a downhill skier doing about 36 mph. However, the pellet received only about 1% of the total energy expended in the experiments, he said.

But the reaction also produced a heating effect that appeared to boost the energy output -- a process dubbed "bootstrapping" by Hurricane's team at Livermore's laser fusion research center, the National Ignition Facility. And that may point scientists toward their ultimate goal of a controlled, sustainable fusion reaction that would provide abundant, safe power, he said.

"We've assembled that stick of dynamite and we've gotten the fuse to light," he said. "If we can get that fuse to burn all the way to the dynamite, it's going to pack a wallop."

The findings were published Wednesday in the scientific journal Nature. While humans have been producing uncontrolled fusion reactions since the 1950s through hydrogen bombs, harnessing nuclear fusion in a controlled setting has eluded scientists for decades.

In a series of tests conducted at the NIF from September through November, scientists used a battery of 192 high-powered lasers to bombard a tiny pellet inside a gold chamber less than an inch long. Inside the pellet was a hair-thin layer of two hydrogen isotopes, deuterium and tritium, chilled to a temperature more than 400 degrees below zero Fahrenheit.

The gold converts the laser light into a bath of X-rays, which cause the surface of the capsule to explode. That drives the capsule inward onto itself, an implosion that builds up pressure on the hydrogen isotopes. The pressure compresses the deuterium-tritium mix to a density more than double that found in the center of the sun, Hurricane said.

Then the deuterium and tritium fuse into one, releasing neutrons and alpha particles -- helium atoms without the electrons circling them. And in a seventh of a billionth of a second, it's over.

However, the most recent experiments produced more helium nuclei, which increased the reaction rate, which produced more alpha particles, Hurricane said. It's that "bootstrapping" that he said may lead scientists to eventually produce a reaction that yields more energy than it consumes.

"It sounds very modest, and it is," he said. "But this is kind of closer than anyone's gotten before, and it is very unique to finally get as much energy out of the fuel as was put into the fuel."

I'll just say this: That title is awesome

[K. A. Pital]

I remember oil fanatics deriding laser ignition as a financial black hole. At the time NIF tests were just dissappointing, so I admitted such fusion technology may be unattainable in the near future. After all, even scientists make mistakes, right? Even very costly ones; but we have to cut them slack.

But now... yeah, Mister White. Science!

[Flagg]

I remember oil fanatics deriding laser ignition as a financial black hole. At the time NIF tests were just dissappointing, so I admitted such fusion technology may be unattainable in the near future. After all, even scientists make mistakes, right? Even very costly ones; but we have to cut them slack.

But now... yeah, Mister White. Science!

I mean I take this with a grain of salt because anything could go wrong in future experiments but this seems really promising.

[Darth Tanner]

Am I correct in my reading that they still needed to use 100 times the energy released to trigger the reaction and that only the energy absorbed directly by the fuel slug is what they are counting as a postive balance against the energy relased by the fuel? In which case they are still no where near a energy positive reaction.

Still good progress... I think... still waiting on that production unit to be released, one of the things I'm hoping to see in my lifetime.

[K. A. Pital]

The slug-absorbed energy is relevant, however. TOKAMAKs at the start also produced less energy than they used up but now thanks to investigation we know that the fusion powerplant is feasible. If there were no positive balance in the first place, this wouldn't even be considered and ITER would not go forward at all. I think the same applies to laser ignition. Positive balance underscores the fact that this is a sound idea, since after that it is a matter of designing a system with desired specifications to actually have an overall energy-positive result. Might be another 50 years, but it's worth it.

[Lagmonster]

This is auxilliary to the point, but if the man who conquers fusion is named Omar Hurricane, no child will ever object to studying about him in history class.

[Borgholio]

So shall we discuss the ramifications if they do manage to build a functioning commercial fusion power plant?

I forsee that if fusion takes off, it will spell the eventual doom of fossil fuel power and internal combustion engines (in most cases), since it will now be possible to have electric almost-anything. Drought will not be an issue because energy-intensive methods of producing water such as desalinization will have all the energy they need, and food production will be cheaper once there is a more abundant source of water.

On a global scale, as fusion energy spreads, wars over oil will gradually cease as it becomes less important to the global economy.

Is that a reasonable idea or is it too much pie in the sky?

[K. A. Pital]

This is auxilliary to the point, but if the man who conquers fusion is named Omar Hurricane, no child will ever object to studying about him in history class.

Just imagine going to Omar Hurricane and the Power of Fusion in a few decades from now

Is that a reasonable idea or is it too much pie in the sky?

Theoretically relying on a mix of fusion and fission plus electric cars (where we should hope for battery progress, otherwise they won't be able to fully replace IC cars) should render large economies like China and India almost carbon-neutral, but hybrid cars like Prius will already go half the way to where you think we'll get. But pre-requisites are bigger than just fusion power. It has to be reliable enough to be constructed by second-world economies, like China, and the batteries for EVs have to be cheap, reliable and providing a decent range.

[Lagmonster]

I am so sorry for continuing to be flippant about this technological achievement, but according to Dr. Hurricane's bio here, his work "...focuses on weapons physics, high energy density physics (HEDP) science, the theory of plasmas, and plasma instability. He has authored 44 journal publications and 54 conference papers, largely in the area of plasma physics and HEDP. He was the lead Secondary Designer for W87 warhead during most of its life extension program (LEP)".

Are we absolutely sure he isn't working out of a volcano lair? I'm suspecting volcano lair.

[Tribble]

So shall we discuss the ramifications if they do manage to build a functioning commercial fusion power plant?

I forsee that if fusion takes off, it will spell the eventual doom of fossil fuel power and internal combustion engines (in most cases), since it will now be possible to have electric almost-anything. Drought will not be an issue because energy-intensive methods of producing water such as desalinization will have all the energy they need, and food production will be cheaper once there is a more abundant source of water.

On a global scale, as fusion energy spreads, wars over oil will gradually cease as it becomes less important to the global economy.

Is that a reasonable idea or is it too much pie in the sky?

Well it partly depends on where you live, and how much battery capacity improves over the years. In countries like Canada and the USA, pure electric cars are pretty much useless atm as their range is simply too small to be competitive. Unless you are a city dweller who never travels, I suppose. But if that were the case, why wouldn't you take public transit? I can see the majority of vehicles eventually becoming hybrids, which would reduce our need for oil somewhat, but I think we're still a long way off from commercially competitive pure electric vehicles.

And even then oil is used for a wide variety of purposes aside from being fuel, and the more advanced tech we use, the more oil we tend to need. If food and water production become much cheaper the human population may increase even faster than it is already, increasing the demand for oil based products like plastics. IMO oil companies don't have much to worry about, they'll find ways to keep making their record profit margins lol

[Borgholio]

IMO oil companies don't have much to worry about, they'll find ways to keep making their record profit margins lol

A substantial majority of the oil produced in the world is used for fuel in one form or another. I'd wager that if fossil fuel were only used for manufacturing purposes, the oil industry would be hurting compared to what is happening now.

[Darth Tanner]

Is that a reasonable idea or is it too much pie in the sky?

Pie shop in low orbit....

We have no idea at all what price fusion energy will sell at as the technology is decades away from even working let alone commercial roll out. Neither do we have any idea what the market will be like in the 50 years or so before a commercial reactor is online. Even if it was practically free it’s going to centuries to replace the existing power infrastructure with any fusion technology. And as mentioned the technology for this is going to be far beyond most countries for a considerable length of time.

As for replacing oil... electricity is cheap enough to do that now, its battery technology that is limiting the replacment of oil in the transport sector and that problem is not going anywhere fast.

[mr friendly guy]

So shall we discuss the ramifications if they do manage to build a functioning commercial fusion power plant?

I forsee that if fusion takes off, it will spell the eventual doom of fossil fuel power and internal combustion engines (in most cases), since it will now be possible to have electric almost-anything. Drought will not be an issue because energy-intensive methods of producing water such as desalinization will have all the energy they need, and food production will be cheaper once there is a more abundant source of water.

On a global scale, as fusion energy spreads, wars over oil will gradually cease as it becomes less important to the global economy.

Is that a reasonable idea or is it too much pie in the sky?

Its actually still contentious whether we can produce electric cars in the numbers you are envisaging ie replacing conventional cars. The reason is the requirement for lithium, and the nascent electric car industry will have to compete extensively with the industries producing tablets and computers. AFAIK all known large lithium deposits are tapped except for the second largest deposit. Which happens to lie in Afghanistan.

Now the other possibility I have heard is that you could use a hydrogen based system instead. I have no idea what materials are required to make that work or would there by any shortages.

[Simon_Jester]

So shall we discuss the ramifications if they do manage to build a functioning commercial fusion power plant?

I forsee that if fusion takes off, it will spell the eventual doom of fossil fuel power and internal combustion engines (in most cases), since it will now be possible to have electric almost-anything. Drought will not be an issue because energy-intensive methods of producing water such as desalinization will have all the energy they need, and food production will be cheaper once there is a more abundant source of water.

On a global scale, as fusion energy spreads, wars over oil will gradually cease as it becomes less important to the global economy.

Is that a reasonable idea or is it too much pie in the sky?

The problem is that fusion isn't automatically going to be cheaper per kilowatt-hour than other sources of energy. It may well turn out to be cheaper to make photovoltaic panels out of more or less pure silicon and tile a hundred thousand square kilometers of desert with them.

[Borgholio]

I think I recall reading that at first, Fusion will be orders of magnitude more expensive than any other form of power on Earth. Once you start mass-producing power plants, it'll get cheaper.

[Sky Captain]

Considering how expensive plain old fission power plant is I am highly sceptical a fusion power plant could be built cheaper. Fisson power if utilised smartly could provide the same benefits a fusion power could at lower price. Yet dominant electrical power plants run on coal and natural gas because it es eaven cheaper. If commercial fussion power ends up twice as expensive as closest alternative (probably optimistic assumption given technological challenges involved) no one will build them outside some niche applications like rocket engines.

[Lord Revan]

IIRC a lot of the cost of running a fission plant comes from handling the fuel and waste though something that's not as hard in a fusion plant (as neither hydrogen or helium are naturally radioactive).

[Napoleon the Clown]

As I recall, the most expensive part of a fission plant is getting it built to code and operational. Once you've got it in operation, it's damn cheap to keep going. The fuel lasts a long time and puts off quite a lot of energy.

The biggest challenge fission faces is the NIMBY situation. People are terrified that a nuclear powerplant is a housefly away from blowing up like an atomic bomb, and they don't want to have uranium being shipped through their town.

[LaCroix]

Also, an aging fission plant is a pain in the ass in multiple ways - there is simply so much stuff that is contaminated and needs to be handled with care. In a fusion plant, afaik, there is only the fusion chamber plating that could become irradiated due to neutron interaction, the rest can be scrapped like any ordinary building.

So you could afford to replace it after it had yielded enough return on investment, or even modernize it comperatively (in comparison to a fission plant) easy.

[Oskuro]

IMO oil companies don't have much to worry about, they'll find ways to keep making their record profit margins lol

Until we run out of the stuff. AFAIK, oil reserves are non-renewable, so alternate energy production is a must for our civilization to be sustainable in the long term.

Oh wait, I said "long term", sorry, didn't want to spout economic taboo. </sarcasm>

[Flagg]

IMO oil companies don't have much to worry about, they'll find ways to keep making their record profit margins lol

Until we run out of the stuff. AFAIK, oil reserves are non-renewable, so alternate energy production is a must for our civilization to be sustainable in the long term.

Oh wait, I said "long term", sorry, didn't want to spout economic taboo. </sarcasm>

Oil companies will start buying renewable companies when we start running out or finally break our addiction to that black heroin. But IIRC with Fracking the US alone can be pumping that horrid shit out of the ground for another 100 years according to the companies. Though that may be propaganda I heard.

[Irbis]

Considering how expensive plain old fission power plant is I am highly sceptical a fusion power plant could be built cheaper. Fisson power if utilised smartly could provide the same benefits a fusion power could at lower price. Yet dominant electrical power plants run on coal and natural gas because it es eaven cheaper.

Only because nonsensical regulations and requirements demanded from nuclear plants. Slap the same regulations on other forms of energy, then you will see solar then coal go extinct in months, if not weeks.

But IIRC with Fracking the US alone can be pumping that horrid shit out of the ground for another 100 years according to the companies. Though that may be propaganda I heard.

Fracking already starts looking like collapsing bubble. I don't know, 100 years might be possible, but at what price?

[Flagg]

Considering how expensive plain old fission power plant is I am highly sceptical a fusion power plant could be built cheaper. Fisson power if utilised smartly could provide the same benefits a fusion power could at lower price. Yet dominant electrical power plants run on coal and natural gas because it es eaven cheaper.

Only because nonsensical regulations and requirements demanded from nuclear plants. Slap the same regulations on other forms of energy, then you will see solar then coal go extinct in months, if not weeks.

But IIRC with Fracking the US alone can be pumping that horrid shit out of the ground for another 100 years according to the companies. Though that may be propaganda I heard.

Fracking already starts looking like collapsing bubble. I don't know, 100 years might be possible, but at what price?

I honestly don't know. I mean there are plus sides to fracking. Like not having to rely on the ME for most of our oil. Unfortunately it ruins water supplies and causes earthquakes. So...

[Irbis]

I honestly don't know. I mean there are plus sides to fracking. Like not having to rely on the ME for most of our oil. Unfortunately it ruins water supplies and causes earthquakes. So...

Well, this report says that not only 100 years are greatly exaggerated, but also that keeping current gas production in USA would require 40 billion $ per year. I don't know how reliable it is, but big gas companies seem to withdraw quietly from fracking already, at least outside of USA.