SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
Fusion power plants use magnetic fields to hold a ball of current-carrying gas (called a plasma). This creates a miniature sun that generates energy through nuclear fusion. The Compact Advanced Tokamak (CAT) concept uses state-of-the-art physics models to potentially improve fusion energy production. The models show that by carefully shaping the plasma and the distribution of current in the plasma, fusion plant operators can suppress turbulent eddies in the plasma. These eddies can cause heat loss. This will enable operators to achieve higher pressures and fusion power with lower current. This advance could help achieve a state where the plasma sustains itself and drives most of its own current.
In this approach to tokamak reactors, the improved performance at reduced plasma current reduces stress and heat loads. This alleviates some of the engineering and materials challenges facing fusion plant designers. Higher pressure also increases an effect where the motion of particles in the plasma naturally generates the current required. This greatly reduces the need for expensive current drive systems that sap a fusion plant’s potential electric power output. It also enables a stationary “always-on” configuration. This approach leads to plants that suffer less stress during operation than typical pulsed approaches to fusion power, enabling smaller, less expensive power plants.
Reference: “The advanced tokamak path to a compact net electric fusion pilot plant” by R.J. Buttery, J.M. Park, J.T. McClenaghan, D. Weisberg, J. Canik, J. Ferron, A. Garofalo, C.T. Holcomb, J. Leuer, P.B. Snyder and The Atom Project Team, 19 March 2021, Nuclear Fusion.
DOI: 10.1088/1741-4326/abe4af
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @06:12AM (1 child)
Small fusion reactors survive on the scraps left over from ITER. They are forced to optimize for cost efficiency.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @06:35AM
missed posting the 1st post.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PinkyGigglebrain on Thursday November 11 2021, @08:14AM (7 children)
And buried in the article
If I'm reading the article right this doesn't really bring fusion any closer, it might make one of the fusion methodsconcepts being looked into more efficient if they ever get it working.
The article reads more like a fluff PR release from someone who is about to ask for more funding than the description of a real breakthrough.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2) by weilawei on Thursday November 11 2021, @08:31AM (1 child)
Isn't most of our developmental work done in simulation because the costs are staggeringly high, and in order to run any experiments, you need megabucks?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @11:53AM
Even if you're not asking for megabucks, you typically want/need to justify your approach with modeling (when possible) when trying to get funding.
(Score: 4, Touché) by inertnet on Thursday November 11 2021, @01:28PM (1 child)
We'll have fusion in 30 years, the same as 40 years ago.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 13 2021, @05:58PM
1) First get lots of hydrogen.
2) I seriously mean a lot.
3) Fusion
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday November 11 2021, @01:32PM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @07:38PM
Mine bitcoin.
There, just tripled their loss and MADE 'money'.
I as genius!!
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @08:12PM
Not true. Reactors produce tens of megawatts, but they haven't been able to achieve sustained breakeven (or more).
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @01:29PM (1 child)
You know, I just read an article about what it took ASML to make a practical EUV lithography machine.
THe physics said sure, but the engineering caused many to drop out of the race and ASML succeeded against long odds with dogged persistence and help from other suppliers.
Perhaps a similar story could be said of SpaceX and low earth orbit, but I wonder if as a way to save humans, it is a little to far term compared to fusion.
Making a practical fusion power source seems much more important to humans today. (I can live without a new gadget, but having to choose between energy and a planet, not so much.)
Like EUV, it seems more of an engineering than physics problem.
Also like EUV, many have tried and so far, no cigar.
Is that because we have not yet gathered the right mix of folks, resources, and sense of existential threat?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday November 11 2021, @01:46PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @01:54PM (1 child)
Compact Advanced Tokamak (CAT) Finds confining plasma is actually WORSE than herding cats
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 12 2021, @12:37PM
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @02:43PM (1 child)
fusion has same problem as renewables: they don't work in a financial system based on destruction of limited energy resources.
as it stands, there are less non-renewables energy resources then before and this difference is reflected in "value". the destruction of resources creates value. infinite availability has no value.
the proof: stop all fossile destruction tomorrow but keep printing and lending government treasury bonds.
on topic, above is prolly why the betatron with its superiour plasma confinment has fallen out of research. a daughter technology: MHD generator research for coal dust burning also vanished overnight. it would have removed the steam-cycle.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 11 2021, @08:54PM
In other words, our economic system needs more woo, an infinite availability resource.
No. Value is reflected in the things we want, not the minor stuff we use up.
I assume by proof, you're going to point to the subsequent collapse of the global economy as being about the burning of fossil fuels rather than about the things we were doing with that burning of fossil fuels?
In other words, MHD wasn't as efficient as steam-cycle! I'm sure that's because it was an infinite availability thing. /sarc
Having actually worked with MHD [wikipedia.org], it's a hard technology to get working well. This reminds me of the people asserting that chemical battery storage will be able to overcome the physical limitations of chemical energy storage by vast margins without understanding the inherent problems of the technology. Here, the problem is that MHD is enormously leaky. It naturally leaks plasma currents that sap energy from the generator. From the above Wikipedia article:
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday November 11 2021, @03:27PM (5 children)
If we ever get fusion even close to working, you can expect the fossil fuel industry to fight this tooth and nail. Just as with EVs.
You think all the FUD and conspiracy theories about clean coal and climate change are bad. You ain't seen nothin' yet. And smoking is good for you and does not cause cancer.
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @04:05PM
"If we ever get fusion even close to working, you can expect the fossil fuel industry to fight this tooth and nail."
You can sleep soundly then... for the rest of your life. Hey, did you hear the one about the car that ran on water, but the oil companies bought the patent so they could KILL IT? The OIL COMPANIES, man!
Fission is the answer for producing electricity from atoms. It works and has worked since the middle of THE PAST CENTURY. Fusion is a scientific research project, not an industry. It you believe in manmade global warming, we need non-carbon-emitting power in mass quantities NOW, not 10, 20, or 30 years from now AT BEST. (Maybe never.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2021, @04:35PM (2 children)
they (fossile fuel clan) are not fighting ev cars. they're fighting "energy storage".
when the first satellit launched over our head with solarcells attached, the war was lost.
a ev car doesn't produce a " vector" that furthers more renewable creation. a ev car runs just fine with electricity from coal, oil and natgas. no need for renewables. buuuuut it has *omg* energy storage capabilities.
pronlongation is about hampering " energy storage", most especially cheap, LONG LASTING(*), efficient batteries. it seems lead-acid battery manufacturers are firmly in the oil trenches. buy new every 3-5 years...
(*) this is is the focus at this point.
tesla is not great for ev cars but for good batteries. also thanks to sony et al.
if we burn 99 million barrels of oil per day, which is a drop compared what the sun gives us free everyday, we gotta store at least half for the night. so storage it is. so how many times and for how long should a energy tank (battery) last to build itself and then store that 99 million barrels of oil per day. there is a value and they (big oil) knowp it and are fighting to keep it below that value.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday November 11 2021, @06:18PM (1 child)
I think they are fighting EVs.
EVs displacing ICEs will eliminate a major use of all that oil that is pumped out of the ground
Energy storage may also be a thing they will fight because of fossil fuel powered "peaker plants" for the electricity grid.
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 12 2021, @09:41AM
well, think about it. a normal person like you and me have no technical means to store energy, unless we invest some energy in.a thumb movement and plant a salat seed and/or acorn.
it is really funny that everyday enormous amounts of free energy "falls" from the sky but nobody much bothers to collect it (salat and acorn) and store it.
oil is stored sunshine energy. but it has ownership attached to it. sunshine rays from the sky don't.
but we have no bucket to keep it, so "solidyfied" sunshine (oil) proponents keep telling us that half a day has no sunshine...
you cannot refill a gasoline holding tank youself ... but with a bucket that can hold electrcity you can refill it yourself.
gasoline tanks are just temporary storage from another source with ownership...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 11 2021, @08:59PM
So what? That will be an insignificant issue compared to just getting the technology to work - just as it is with electric vehicles.
With little to no actual effort coming from the fossil fuel industry, let us note. More effort to sabotage "clean coal", "climate change", etc comes from the advocates for climate change mitigation.