SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Lockheed Martin has quietly obtained a patent associated with its design for a potentially revolutionary compact fusion reactor, or CFR. If this project has been progressing on schedule, the company could debut a prototype system that size of shipping container, but capable of powering a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier or 80,000 homes, sometime in the next year or so.
The patent, for a portion of the confinement system, or embodiment, is dated Feb. 15, 2018. The Maryland-headquartered defense contractor had filed a provisional claim on April 3, 2013 and a formal application nearly a year later. Our good friend Stephen Trimble, chief of Flightglobal's Americas Bureau, subsequently spotted it and Tweeted out its basic details.
In 2014, the company also made a splash by announcing they were working on the device at all and that it was the responsibility of its Skunk Works advanced projects office in Palmdale, California. At the time, Dr. Thomas McGuire, head of the Skunk Works’ Compact Fusion Project, said the goal was to have a working reactor in five years and production worthy design within 10.
[...] Considering the five year timeline Dr. McGuire put out in 2014 for achieving a workable prototype, maybe we’re due for another big announcement from Lockheed Martin in the near future.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday March 28 2018, @01:16PM (8 children)
I think what people are missing is that: when fusion power debuts, it's going to be marginally efficient. Right now they can't get net positive power out of anything you might call a sustained reaction. When the first "practical" units come online, they're going to be expensive and weak (as opposed to the expensive and useless that they are today.) Then, it's going to be "another 5-10 years" before they become cost-competitive with the most expensive of other current industrial scale power generation technologies.
Oh, and expect some nasty side-effect environmental issues from the early fusion generators too. The core tech may be clean, but there will be enabling engineering that uses something or other that isn't exactly environmentally friendly.
I'm all for developing it, but it's going to be one of those technologies that comes into the world sideways and slowly, like Artificial Intelligence.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday March 28 2018, @07:34PM (7 children)
Anything that generates a lot of neutrons will become annoyingly radioactive. The first generation commercial fusion reactors might not produce any radioactive waste, but when they reach their end of life, there will be huge chunks of the reactor itself that will be radioactive.
It isn't going to be instant free power for everyone like people have been promising. It's going to start out expensive and get better over time. Just like any technology.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday March 28 2018, @08:15PM (4 children)
I don't know - wood for fire started out cheap and has gotten more expensive over time...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Thursday March 29 2018, @09:23PM (3 children)
I don't know where you get your wood from, but chainsaws have made getting firewood cheaper than at any point in history. A couple of guys can do the work of dozens.
If you mean "I have to pay $x for wood when it used to be cheaper." I make about 50 bucks an hour. I can buy an entire truckload of wood for $50. My lazy ass can not chop an entire truckload of wood in an hour.
And check out this thing [youtube.com]. No idea if it is more economical, but it is damn cool.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday March 30 2018, @12:24AM (2 children)
Wood used to be obtained for free - pre split and dried by nature, all you had to do was collect it.
Then "Kings" owned the land and you had to do something for them to get permission to collect wood.
Now, you have to travel far with a truck to find wood to pay money to harvest. It's still only $30 per tree, plus cutting, splitting, drying and hauling - but that's a hell of a lot of infrastructure to maintain just to get some wood "easily" because you're using a chainsaw.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Monday April 02 2018, @09:54PM (1 child)
So you are pining for the times when the serfs were owned by feudal lords? Because you could get cheap firewood?
Ok, dude, whatever. Either buy some land with trees on it or pay someone that has them.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday April 03 2018, @03:16AM
Not pining, not oaking, just calling out that the price of wood as fuel has steadily risen over time.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Thursday March 29 2018, @03:38AM (1 child)
I have been thinking about that point more and more and it is a really good one. Lockheed I'm sure expects this to be quite lucrative for them on a per unit basis. They aren't into mass manufacturing things like GE washing machines. They want to make a handful of expensive things and sell them to discerning customers such as the US military.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Thursday March 29 2018, @09:25PM
Another poster mentioned the absurd actual cost of shipping fuel to deserts in the middle east. The military does not care much for cost effectiveness, and by proxy, neither does Lockheed. So I would be very surprised if this thing made any sort of economical sense.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh