• Baggie@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 minutes ago

      Idk dude, we already have the sun and wind but they hate that stuff too, despite it being very close to free. Hell they’ll probably bitch about fusion causing a surplus of power outside peak loads.

      If it doesn’t perpetuate the broken ways we currently do things it doesn’t give their buddies money, so it’s woke or something else bullshit.

  • meowmeowbeanz@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    France’s 22-minute plasma reaction is a bold stride toward sustainable fusion energy but remains experimental.

    🐱🐱🐱🐱

  • CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Well, I’m still skeptical, but I have far more trust in France’s reporting than Chinese claims.

  • DataDisrupter@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 day ago

    I didn’t see any mention of the output in the article. 22MW injected, but does anyone know if the reaction was actually generating a positive output?

    • Jesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Sounds like the goal of the test wasn’t to vet ignition power in relation to output. These people are testing the durability of system designs that can maintain a reaction after ignition.

      If this was a car, they wouldn’t be testing the fuel efficiency, they’d be testing how long they could drive before the wheels fell off.

    • sushibowl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      75
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      No magnetic confinement fusion reactor in existence has ever generated a positive output. The current record belongs to JET, with a Q factor of 0.67. This record was set in 1997.

      The biggest reason we haven’t had a record break for a long time is money. The most favourable reaction for fusion is generally a D-T (Deuterium-Tritium) reaction. However, Tritium is incredibly expensive. So, most reactors run the much cheaper D-D reaction, which generates lower output. This is okay because current research reactors are mostly doing research on specific components of an eventual commercial reactor, and are not aiming for highest possible power output.

      The main purpose of WEST is to do research on diverter components for ITER. ITER itself is expected to reach Q ≥ 10, but won’t have any energy harvesting components. The goal is to add that to its successor, DEMO.

      Inertial confinement fusion (using lasers) has produced higher records, but they generally exclude the energy used to produce the laser from the calculation. NIF has generated 3.15MJ of fusion output by delivering 2.05MJ of energy to it with a laser, nominally a Q = 1.54. however, creating the laser that delivered the power took about 300MJ.

      • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        The input energy doesnt matter that much. Nobody is going to use 1980s laser tech to power a real reactor. As with OP, inertial confinement is interested in very small nuanced science aspects, not making a power plant.

      • DataDisrupter@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        I wasn’t aware of that distinction about the energy for the laser to generate the heat energy within the reaction not being factored into the Q value, very interesting, thank you! Would that energy for the laser still be required in a “stable reaction” continuously, or would it be something that would “trail off”?

        • Womble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          Inertial confinement doesnt produce a “stable reaction” it is pulsed by it’s nature, think of it in the same way as a single cylinder internal combustion engine, periodic explosions which are harnessed to do useful work. So no the laser energy is required every single time to detonate the fuel pellet.

          NIF isnt really interested in fusion for power production, it’s a weapons research facility that occasionally puts out puff pieces to make it seem like it has civilian applications.

            • Womble@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 hours ago

              It would be more productive if you said how you think im wrong. Just saying ‘youre wrong’ doesnt really add anything to the discussion.

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 minutes ago

      It’s always thirty years away because every time it gets close to 15 years away they cut the funding in half. Zeno’s Dichotomy in action.

  • tomkatt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    96
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is freaking awesome. Only a few years ago it was exciting to see a fusion reaction last a fraction of a second.

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      2 days ago

      The amusing thing is that the sun is actually quite a shit fusion reactor. It’s power per unit volume is tiny. It just makes it up in sheer volume. A solar level fusion reactor would be almost completely useless to us. Instead we need to go far beyond the sun’s output to just be viable.

      It’s like describing one of the mega mining dumper trucks as an “artificial mule”.

      • notsoshaihulud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        2 days ago

        I think this energy density math really depends on whether only the core or the whole surface area is taken into consideration.

      • lurklurk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Arguably, the nearby sun scale fusion reactor has been fairly useful for us. Nowadays we can convert its output directly into electricity using solar cells

        • cynar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          I never said it wasn’t useful, just a very low efficiency reactor. Then again, if it was better, it would burn out faster, which would be bad for life on earth.

            • cynar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              That’s part of the reason a moon base could be viable. The sun outputs a reasonable amount of helium 3, which is great for fusion reactions. Unfortunately it tends to sit at the top of our atmosphere and get blown away again. On the moon, it gets captured by the dust in collectable quantities.

    • yogurt@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      They say “artificial sun” because that’s what it is though, there’s no fusion reactions here they’re just microwaving hydrogen to millions of degrees to study the kind of thing that would happen IF somebody runs a fusion reactor for 22 minutes.

  • LostWon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Maybe if it runs longer, we all get to jump to a better timeline. 😅

    • Pumpkin Escobar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      76
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Or the world blows up and it’s all over. I guess what I’m saying is, no downside, fire it up and let’s see what happens.

    • Obelix@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m sceptical. Even if somebody would present a working fusion reactor today, what would the timeline to replace everything based on fossil fuels even be? Build several thousand of expensive fusion reactors in every country of the world, even in geopolitical rivals like China, Russia or North Korea or war-torn third world countries? Replace every car with an electrical one? Replace home heating everywhere? Rebuild every ship and airplane worldwide?

      • JayObey711@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean yea that’s the plan. What are the other options? Force every countrie to stop producing instead to reduce carbon emissions that way? Wich one Sounds more realistic? And I feel like you assume that fusion reactors are dangerous because your comments about war torn countries. But it’s not possible to turn them into weapons. They run on hydrogen. And if they ever oberheat or something the magnets stop working and the reaction stops.

      • CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Progress is progress, and it’s good to be skeptical (I literally just posted a comment saying “I’m skeptical”!), but progress is good. 🙂 What other alternatives are there?

        If it doesn’t make dollars, it doesn’t make sense. That’s why the electric car movement is having a hard time really taking off rn; it is hard to justify & all the tech, all our builds, aren’t exactly super economical yet. And they’re not built for tough conditions, heavy towing, long commutes, and easily workable & recyclable components.

        …but things are, indeed, getting better. If you look at it from a macro view. Lithium recycling can be done even a decade ago, but IIRC it was relatively small scale & the lithium could be refreshed “most of the way”, not fully. The right things will catch on when their time is right & its viability is realized.

        Man’s greatest strength is our shared knowledge, technology, science, and innovation. I encourage you to make good decisions in your personal life and be positive. 🙂

      • LostWon@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I was just making an abstract sci-fi joke based on how cold fusion has been presented like a Holy Grail in the past. Obviously a better source of energy isn’t going to solve all our problems, no matter how good it is.

  • Placebonickname@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    134
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    Meanwhile in America we’re trying to make macdonalds cheaper by bundling an extra sandwich to go along with a value meal…

        • weker01@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          That was such a culture shock when I went to the us for the first time.

          In Germany and many places in Europe do not think of burgers as sandwiches. I was so confused when I ordered a sandwich and got something like a burger.

          I expected something like this

          I expected something like this. My confusion must’ve been quite the sight, the waitress even seemed concerned. Tasted great though.

          • catloaf@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Only difference between that and a burger is a burger is usually on a roll, not slices of bread. (And a burger is always hot, but then so are some sandwiches.)

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    109
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why don’t we use “shatters world record” like the pro-China articles where they did this for 16 minutes?

    I know why.