UW fusion reactor concept could be cheaper than coal

Phys.Org ^ | 10/10/2014 | by Michelle Ma & Provided by University of Washington

[Red Badger]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dead_Past

[dangerdoc]

Don’t worry, it’s only 20 years away.

[Bubba_Leroy]

I remember back in the 1970s when fission reactor nuclear power plants were going to be so cheap that they would not ever meter your electricity. Didn't quite work out that way.

Power plants are basically public works projects, whether they are owned directly by the government or by highly regulated "private" monopolies. In the history of mankind, no public works project has ever been built for what it was projected to cost.

I would love to see an alternative power source that costs less in real life than oil, gas or coal. So far, there are none and I do not expect to see any in my lifetime.

[Red Badger]

A mere eye blink of mortal time...............

[Red Badger]

Uncle Xi Jinping, has all the dough necessary....................

[thackney]

“To cheap to meter”

Lewis Strauss, then Chairman of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, in 1954.

By the 70’s, we had built enough of them to know better. Most knew it then.

[Red Badger]

Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and now Fukushima have effectively ended any new fission plants ever being built..................

[Red Badger]

Beat me to it!................

[RetiredTexasVet]

“They have designed a concept...”

A lot of those “concepts” out there, but the real test is translating a “concept” into real economic functioning item.

[thackney]

ended any new fission plants ever being built

Probably not here, but I'll bet they get built somewhere in the World. Even Saudi is still planning Nuke plants, IIRC.

[dangerdoc]

The magic is that is it always 20 years away.

[Red Badger]

Well, they got the bucks, and lots of sand if something goes wrong.................

[thackney]

E.U. Approves Plan for New Nuclear Power Station in Britain
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/09/business/international/eu-approves-plan-for-new-nuclear-power-station-in-britain.html?_r=0
OCT. 8, 2014

Not everyone is as crazy as the current Germans.

[Red Badger]

Bet it never sees the light of day................

[Bubba_Leroy]

In the early 1970s, the South Texas Nuclear Project was still being sold based on the “too cheap to meter” claim. The actual construction cost ended up being approximately six or seven times the projected cost. Operating costs have been several times projected costs too.

I am actually a supporter of nuclear power. Unlike wind, solar and every other alternative energy scheme, nuclear power can be economically feasible. Plus it is best not to put all of your energy generating eggs in one basket.

Without the incredible success we have had with fracking (which no one seriously predicted even 10 years ago), we would still be looking at having to import more and more oil from the Middle East, Venezuela and other third world hell holes to keep up with our energy needs.

Now if we can continue to expand fracking in the U.S., open up oil and gas development on federal land, and get the Keystone Pipeline built to bring in oil from Canada we have a real shot at keeping our economy going until fission and maybe someday fusion reactors can actually be built and operated economically.

[thackney]

I think it will. They have kept progressing since Fukushima. They still have public support (not by everyone of course) and there is strong political support across all three main parties.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/United-Kingdom/

- - - - - - -

I think you will find others on this list that will continue to build Nuke Plants.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/

[thackney]

In the early 1970s, the South Texas Nuclear Project was still being sold based on the “too cheap to meter” claim.

I don't agree.

The actual construction cost ended up being approximately six or seven times the projected cost.

Not quite that much, but 5.6 times is bad enough. Caused by several factors include multiple significant rule changes by the Fed during design and construction. Root&Scoot contributed to the problems.

[Bubba_Leroy]

In the early 1970s, the South Texas Nuclear Project was still being sold based on the “too cheap to meter” claim.

I don't agree.

That's my recollection and I am sticking with it, but I was in high school at the time and I have lost a lot of grey cells since then.

[ckilmer]

Yeah, I read this article. Its also helpful to post some of the comments in the comment section of the same article. As they give other competing fusion designs.

.................

Da Schneib Here's another "small fusion" concept that a private company is working on: http://lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/ The technique they're using is called "plasma focus fusion." They're currently rebuilding their experiment to eliminate arcing that was vaporizing their electrical connection and contaminating the plasma. They expect to have the new device up in a few months; they've already moved the connector outside the vacuum chamber, and have successfully used an indium ring and silver plating on the steel baseplate to reduce the resistance to 6 μΩ.

cantdrive85( Eric Lerner's focus fusion process involves creating electricity directly without the need for heating water to spin a turbine. The cost is but a fraction of coal power production, nearly inexhaustible fuel supplies, and totally clean.)

Da Schneib And another, unfortunately their website is being rebuilt, called "Polywell fusion" that's based on the Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor, as extended by the late Dr. Robert Bussard. They have finished proving that their magnetic containment scheme will work for a net-power-output fusion device, and posted a paper on arXiv: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.0133v1.pdf

Also worthy of note are Electron Power Systems http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/central/ and General Fusion http://www.generalfusion.com/ both of which are less promising to my mind than either the Plasma Focus or the Polywell. LENR isn't dead, but it's going very slowly. Here's a blog post on the Polywell arXiv paper, which details what they've accomplished and announced, and what remains to be done: http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/06/bussard-emc2-fusion-project-publishes.html I hope fusion will be solved this decade; I think it's a virtual certainty that if it's not, it will be in the 2020s.

[Kozak]

Ever since the 1950’s we’ve been 30 years away from practical fusion power...