RE: Experimental Energy - Fusion
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Thanks a lot for this thorough write. I will need more time in the evening to reread it and let the information sink and connect.
So you think that ITER approach to fusion is more viable? Do we need constant science and engineering work to succeed in the foreseeable future or is there a need for a scientific breakthrough?
@toofasteddie this may interest you
@tipu curate
0
0
0.000
Upvoted 👌 (Mana: 0/22) Liquid rewards.
ITER is the big Lab in order to develop the technologies for the commercial Fusion plants of the future. There are also a few other developments on-going but the most promising and certain is ITER.
We are working hard to achieve the "First Plasma" milestone within this decade.
Good post
@tipu curate
Upvoted 👌 (Mana: 65/78) Liquid rewards.
I don't have access to the raw data available to me in conventional nuclear power, but everything I see tells me ITER will be successful. I don't know that they would succeed within the decade, but I'd put my money on it, though. I feel the ITER project and its predecessors have been so carefully developed over the decades. From a certain perspective, its success is almost guaranteed.
On this decade we will see the "First Plasma" event, which means an outstanding achievement because we would demonstrate we can handle, understand and control this state (Plasma state), later on, probably beyond 2030, Plasma trials including deuterium+tritium will arrive. Now, the most important is to reach a safe magnetic vacuum vessel which is rigth now under construction and on which I am working on the manufacturing of Toroidal and Poloidal superconducting magnets.
I am happy to find enthusiast here on HIVE ;-)
Man, you guys are rockstars and the world doesn't even know it yet. I wish this stuff would happen faster. The thought of converting star power to our uses is exhilarating.
I am glad I connected you guys :)
Let's make an ITER community on Hive ;)
Thank you for your response and support, @ervin-lemark.
Do you think that the ITER approach to fusion is more viable?
Absolutely, yes.
ITER's approach via magnetic confinement is definitely the most viable approach to fusion at this time. Magnetic confinement has been the most successful attempt at fusion our society attempted.
The predecessor to ITER, the Joint European Torus, I believe, was the most efficient attempt at fusion. In 1997, it produced 16-MW of fusion power while consuming 24-MW of power needed to ignite the fuel.
Do we need constant science and engineering work to succeed in the foreseeable future?
Constant science and engineering work are vital to the success of fusion. Breakthroughs in new technologies will help our society discover the most practical means of using this power production for daily use.
Thank you very much for your feedback.
I see that my second question wasn't precise enough. Let me try again.
Is the success of commercial-grade fusion power plants achievable without a significant breakthrough? If yes, what are the timeframe forecasts?
Thanks again.
!invest_vote
I think it’s achievable through magnetic confinement without a significant breakthrough. I feel @toofasteddie has the right of it. I feel Fusion tech through magnetic confinement is at a point where they are tweaking things to achieve desired results.
I would give the ITER their ten year projection for a sustainable plasma reaction needed for efficient fusion production
That's great to hear. How long from ITER to the first commercial power plant? I am asking to see whether I will live to see it in action :)
I don’t think you or I will be around to see it given historical timelines between theory and applications.
Hans Beth in 1930s, if I’m not mistaken first proposed that the stars used the H-H fusion. Research into fusion started as early as the 1920s.
Hans Beth received the Nobel Prize in the late 60s after the scientific community confirmed it.
The first fusion reactor that created a plasma was the Russian T-3 Tokamak in 1968 (need confirmation).
So between the 1920s and the JETs most efficient plasma and fusion run in 1983 we’re looking at roughly 63 years. When ITER succeeds at maintaining a continuous plasma in 10 years it would put that date range to 110 years.
The rough date range does not include the challenges to heat removal, waste-, and radiation management.
Thanks again for your very thorough answer.
That's why I was asking about the chance of a breakthrough :)
Have a great week.
I hope you have a great week as well.
I need to learn how to fully read questions. I think I can accomplish that task but I find I don’t always reach the goal.
When you wrote about breakthroughs I only focused upon the technologies I was writing about. Breakthroughs in plasma management would significantly speed up the dev process.
There is another fusion process I deliberately didn’t discuss in this article because I wanted to handle it separately: muon-induced fusion. It can occur at room temperature and even cryogenic temperatures.
This would be a breakthrough :)
Don't worry about the questions and answers game. You can't know what goes on in my head when I pose the question.
To explain it a bit. Currently, I am reading Cixin Liu's trilogy Remembrance of Earth's Past
It's an intriguing read. A mixture of hard sci-fi, sociology, philosophy, ...
One of the major points of the series is the distinction of natural progress versus a breakthrough or a leap in scientific progress.
Like in space travel propellant, for example. Classic propulsion (rocket fuel) vs nuclear power (fission) vs fusion power.
Thanks a lot for this discussion, I appreciate it very much.
@ervin-lemark denkt du hast ein Vote durch @investinthefutur verdient!
@ervin-lemark thinks you have earned a vote of @investinthefutur !