Fusion

[alanjjohnstone]

It was from the Socialist Party i learned of the astounding potential of nuclear fusion so it is fitting i post this article on our webpages.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/09/nuclear-fusion-on-brink-of-being-realised-say-mit-scientists

Quote:

The dream of nuclear fusion is on the brink of being realised, according to a major new US initiative that says it will put fusion power on the grid within 15 years.

Hopefully, it is not merely wishful thinking put out by a company PR department to attract investment since i first read of it, fusion was just around the corner, like socialism always was

[ALB]

Let's hope so.

[Dave B]

Actually that kind of nuclear fusion reactor has, as such, never been a theoretical problem. The problem always was it would need super electromagnets and that would need high temperature super conducting material. They have known that super conducting material exists and could be made etc etc for at least about 30 years but it wasn’t bendy like wires and could only operate at minus 160 degrees centigrade sort of thing. They have been working on it and got to material that works at higher and higher temps. But making stuff like that is more like alchemy than anything else without any reason to believe that it would eventually even be possible.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARC_fusion_reactor The amount of resources and funding allocated to superconductor research has been quite absurd by even capitalist standards.  http://news.softpedia.com/news/Superconductor-Research-Receives-1-2-Million-in-Funds-124235.shtml “…….In 2016, the U.S. Department of Defense purchased 149 Tomahawk Block IV missiles for $202.3 million………..”  Will it be too little too late?  https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-arctic-climate-tipping-points-methane-and-the-future-of-the-biosphere/5631112 I think it is and it is a matter of brace for impact.  I think the scientific community themselves are culpable as well. I go to these lectures on the large hadron collider and very large telescope research stuff with all the money spent on it etc. Stand up and tell them that we should be focusing on other stuff rather than trying to discover what happen 15 billion years ago and the reaction is as if you have just let off a really loud eggy one.

[alanjjohnstone]

Dave, once up and going, fully operational what are the main risks to a fusion power plant and what would be the consequences of such a failure?

[Dave B]

iNone. To keep it going is like trying keep a pencil balanced on its tip. Breath on it and it falls over and stops dead. Fukushima type meltdown is a total impossibility In fact that is the problem. Actually computer power played a significant part in getting it to run for 10 seconds at the one in England near Oxford. Because to keep the plasma stable etc they had to monitor it and do really fast alterations to the magnetic field or something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_European_Torus I think they have been looking at a slight variation of it involving lithium or something which is easier but produces a potential radioactive waste product, something like tritium? But it has short half life of a decade or so unlike the half lives of thousands of years of some of the stuff they do with atomic energy now. I have sort have been following over the years, went to lectures in Manchester by the scientific director of the JET one and a bod from one in France. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER That is like a $20 billion project and running. It is quite insane really. It costs $20 billion, for the prototype and pilot plant, because they have only got crap super conducting material. And the research money they have spent on superconductors probably doesn’t add up to $200 million? As well as being black magic with eye of toad and tail of newt stuff; it has also been plagued over the by fraudulent and exaggerated irreproducible claims to pull in more grant money. The idea or philosophy of ITER would be future bigger ones or say 10 times bigger would be 1000 times easier to run etc and that they would be on an engineering learning curve. The americans have spent a small fortune on one that produces the plasma and heat etc etc using lazers.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility

[Bijou Drains]

Dave B wrote:

iNone. To keep it going is like trying keep a pencil balanced on its tip. Breath on it and it falls over and stops dead. Fukushima type meltdown is a total impossibility In fact that is the problem. Actually computer power played a significant part in getting it to run for 10 seconds at the one in England near Oxford. Because to keep the plasma stable etc they had to monitor it and do really fast alterations to the magnetic field or something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_European_Torus I think they have been looking at a slight variation of it involving lithium or something which is easier but produces a potential radioactive waste product, something like tritium? But it has short half life of a decade or so unlike the half lives of thousands of years of some of the stuff they do with atomic energy now. I have sort have been following over the years, went to lectures in Manchester by the scientific director of the JET one and a bod from one in France. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER That is like a $20 billion project and running. It is quite insane really. It costs $20 billion, for the prototype and pilot plant, because they have only got crap super conducting material. And the research money they have spent on superconductors probably doesn’t add up to $200 million? As well as being black magic with eye of toad and tail of newt stuff; it has also been plagued over the by fraudulent and exaggerated irreproducible claims to pull in more grant money. The idea or philosophy of ITER would be future bigger ones or say 10 times bigger would be 1000 times easier to run etc and that they would be on an engineering learning curve. The americans have spent a small fortune on one that produces the plasma and heat etc etc using lazers.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility

It always surprises me that more interest hasn't been taken in metal powder internal combustion engines or even Stirling engines.https://www.mcgill.ca/newsroom/channels/news/could-metal-particles-be-clean-fuel-future-257172

[Dave B]

i  That is connected in a way but you need to follow it back to electricity. As you can reconvert metal oxides back to the metal and oxygen by electrolysis or electricity. photovoltaicsolar panels that produce electricity are getting better and cheaper all the time so that in some sunny places;  ……..The price of solar power has continued to fall so that in many countries it is cheaper than ordinary fossil fuelelectricity from the grid (there is "grid parity")…….. They will become as cheap as wall paper and you be able to cover the Sahara desert with it generating enough power supply europe. Providing you had a super conducting material to transmit the electricity over that kind of distance.  Renewable and Sustainable Energy ReviewsVolume 55, March 2016, Pages 59-72  Superconducting transmission lines – Sustainable electric energy transfer with higher public acceptance? Despite the extensive research and development investments into superconducting science and technology, both at the fundamental and at the applied levels, many benefits of superconducting transmission lines (SCTL) remain unknown to the public and decision makers at large. This paper aims at informing about the progress in this important research field. Superconducting transmission lines have a tremendous size advantage and lower total electrical losses for high capacity transmission plus a number of technological advantages compared to solutions based on standard conductors. This leads to a minimized environmental impact and enables an overall more sustainable transmission of electric energy. One of the direct benefits may be an increased public acceptance due to the low visual impact with a subsequent reduction of approval time. The access of remote renewable energy (RE) sources with high-capacity transmission is rendered possible with superior efficiency. That not only translates into further reducing CO2emissions in a global energy mix that is still primarily based on fossils, but can also facilitate the development of RE sources given for instance the strong local opposition against the construction of new transmission lines. The socio-economic aspects of superconducting transmission lines based on the novel magnesium diboride (MgB2) superconductor and on high-temperature superconductors (HTS) are compared to state-of-the-art HVDC overhead lines and underground cables based on resistive conductors. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136403211501120X Given priorities it is amazing what can be done. Although the concept of a nuclear powered submarine originated around 1940 it was still science fiction. Around 1950 and a below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_Breeder_Reactor_I Po faced admirals asked the scientist to build a nuclear reactor small enough to fit on a submarine. They burst out laughing apparently. …….she was commissioned USS Nautilus (SSN-571), on 30 September 1954.On 17 January 1955, she departed Groton, Connecticutto begin sea trials. The submarine was 320 feet (98 m) long, and cost about $55 million……… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_submarine

[Major McPharter]

Looks like the Sea coal men might be out of business.

[Author]

Posts