Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Live: Scientists herald nuclear fusion breakthrough that ‘could bring limitless clean energy’
The Telegraph ^ | 13/12/22

Posted on 12/13/2022 7:21:09 AM PST by Eleutheria5

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last
To: Eleutheria5

Yawn. Since a heat to electricity efficiency in nuclear plants is around 30%, the rest goes up that huge cooling tower. This means a 3.33 X gain (not 1.19 X) is break even. With capital costs, legal, regulatory, O and M costs this thing will never be constructed.


61 posted on 12/13/2022 8:56:45 AM PST by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cicero2k

No. Build it now! Sink billions into it! Just make sure it doesn’t fall apart until mid 2025, and then blame it on President Trump.


62 posted on 12/13/2022 8:58:41 AM PST by Eleutheria5 (Free country? Good morning, Rip. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5

I heard this is thirty years away!!!


63 posted on 12/13/2022 9:00:07 AM PST by ontap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

“We can prove anything. We just need more tax dollars.”


64 posted on 12/13/2022 9:01:19 AM PST by Organic Panic (Democrats. Memories as short as Joe Biden's eyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cicero2k

“Yawn. Since a heat to electricity efficiency in nuclear plants is around 30%, the rest goes up that huge cooling tower. This means a 3.33 X gain (not 1.19 X) is break even. With capital costs, legal, regulatory, O and M costs this thing will never be constructed.”

-———Yep!-——————

First nuclear chain reaction

The Chianti fiasco purchased by Eugene Wigner to help celebrate the first self-sustaining, controlled chain reaction. It was signed by the participants.
The next day, 2 December 1942, everybody assembled for the experiment. There were 49 scientists present.[a] Although most of the S-1 Executive Committee was in Chicago, only Crawford Greenewalt was present, at Compton’s invitation.[92] Other dignitaries present included Szilard, Wigner and Spedding.[91] Fermi, Compton, Anderson and Zinn gathered around the controls on the balcony, which was originally intended as a viewing platform.[93] Samuel Allison stood ready with a bucket of concentrated cadmium nitrate, which he was to throw over the pile in the event of an emergency. The startup began at 09:54. Walter Zinn removed the zip, the emergency control rod, and secured it.[93][94] Norman Hilberry stood ready with an axe to cut the scram line, which would allow the zip to fall under the influence of gravity.[94][95] While Leona Woods called out the count from the boron trifluoride detector in a loud voice, George Weil, the only one on the floor, withdrew all but one of the control rods. At 10:37 Fermi ordered Weil to remove all but 13 feet (4.0 m) of the last control rod. Weil withdrew it 6 inches (15 cm) at a time, with measurements being taken at each step.[93][94]

The process was abruptly halted by the automatic control rod reinserting itself, due to its trip level being set too low.[96] At 11:25, Fermi ordered the control rods reinserted. He then announced that it was lunch time.[93]

The experiment resumed at 14:00.[93] Weil worked the final control rod while Fermi carefully monitored the neutron activity. Fermi announced that the pile had gone critical (reached a self-sustaining reaction) at 15:25. Fermi switched the scale on the recorder to accommodate the rapidly increasing electrical current from the boron trifluoride detector. He wanted to test the control circuits, but after 28 minutes, the alarm bells went off to notify everyone that the neutron flux had passed the preset safety level, and he ordered Zinn to release the zip. The reaction rapidly halted.[97][94] The pile had run for about 4.5 minutes at about 0.5 watts.[98] Wigner opened a bottle of Chianti, which they drank from paper cups.[99]

wiki


65 posted on 12/13/2022 9:08:58 AM PST by TexasGator (!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5

I’d like to report a suspicious person- Me!...I’m suspicious of this whole thing and the timing of it!


66 posted on 12/13/2022 9:11:34 AM PST by equaviator (There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dsrtsage

Exactly right. The Left want us going backwards not forward. Would make their goal of total control more difficult.


67 posted on 12/13/2022 9:27:20 AM PST by subterfuge (I'm a pure-blood!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5

He lost me when he prioritized it’s use for:

“modern nuclear weapons”
“defense programs”
“deterrence”
“weapons technologies”

I can see who’s at the helm and where this is headed.
The timing and political environment of the announcement is so suspicious.
This just looks like Biden admin, global management trickery.
Clean energy and quality of life is not what the Department of Energy or any other agency really wants.
It’s bait and switch.
They want a silent spring void of humans.


68 posted on 12/13/2022 10:02:38 AM PST by conservativeimage (For the love of life there's a trade off. We could lose it all but we'll go down fighting. Won't we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator
Negligible amount. E=MC2

I don't believe that equation is applicable to electrolysis.

Much less mass is converted in the chemical reaction.

The question is still...

How much more net energy will be produced that will be greater than the expended energy to produce the hydrogen and then to fuse the hydrogen.

IOW, is...

net gained fusion energy > (energy to produce hydrogen + energy to fuse the hydrogen)

If the netGainedFE not greater than spent energy for Electrolysis + spent energy for fusion ignition

then...

Not worth it

Also consider that there are personnel charges and equipment charges and building charges, and likely many others.
69 posted on 12/13/2022 10:03:02 AM PST by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: adorno

“I don’t believe that equation is applicable to electrolysis.”

It is.


70 posted on 12/13/2022 10:08:28 AM PST by TexasGator (!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator
“I don’t believe that equation is applicable to electrolysis.”

It is.


It is, but, the energy works the other way, where it takes energy to split the water molecule, thereby consuming energy to produce the hydrogen; iow, the action uses energy rather than producing energy (though there is an insignificant amount of energy produced by the splitting of the water molecule

If hydrogen was readily available, there would be no need to use the energy to produce electrolysis, but as it stands electrolysis requires the use of energy.
71 posted on 12/13/2022 10:26:07 AM PST by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: adorno

‘I don’t believe that equation is applicable to electrolysis.”

https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module5_binding.htm#:~:text=E%20%3D%20mc%202%3A%20The%20mass%20defect%20and,E%2Fc%202%2C%20where%20E%20is%20the%20binding%20energy.


72 posted on 12/13/2022 10:26:10 AM PST by TexasGator (!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: adorno

Chemical bonds are much weaker than nuclear bonds.

The amount of energy to chemically separate hydrogen is very small compared to the energy gained in fusion.


73 posted on 12/13/2022 10:29:53 AM PST by TexasGator (!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: TalonDJ

“They never tell you about all the other energy that was being used.”

I’m sure there’s all kids of loss and overhead. Not to mention 10% for the Big Guy.


74 posted on 12/13/2022 10:38:08 AM PST by PLMerite ("They say that we were Cold Warriors. Yes, and a bloody good show, too." - Robert Conquest )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Rurudyne

“..Then so-called “progressives” happened. Rule by the hand wringing wuss class....”

LOL...
It’s more like: “on the eighth day, Satan created “progressives” in an attempt to destroy all of God’s creation.”


75 posted on 12/13/2022 11:18:33 AM PST by lgjhn23 (Pray for America....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: desertfreedom765

“””On the other hand they could start building today 4th generation nuclear plants which are safe and can use nuclear waste from older plants as fuel. Or start building Thorium based nuclear plants.”””

BINGO!


76 posted on 12/13/2022 12:04:24 PM PST by isthisnickcool (1218 - NEVER FORGET!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: calljack

Yep +


77 posted on 12/13/2022 2:10:32 PM PST by Vaduz (LAWYERS )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: HonorInPa

The team reportedly used*** 2.1 megajoules of energy to create the conditions for the reaction, and achieved a 2.5 megajoules*** return


78 posted on 12/13/2022 2:11:56 PM PST by Vaduz (LAWYERS )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

From science.org
https://www.science.org/content/article/historic-explosion-long-sought-fusion-breakthrough

” The [laser] beams are focused on the target—a gold can the size of a pencil eraser containing a peppercorn-size fuel capsule. Heated to millions of degrees, the gold emits x-rays that vaporize the diamond shell of the capsule. The blasted diamond implodes the fuel, compressing and heating it.”

Great so we can produce a net energy gain by VAPORIZING DIAMONDS AND GOLD
Rolling on the floor laughing, limitless energy as long as you have lots of DIAMONDS!


79 posted on 12/13/2022 2:29:39 PM PST by brookwood (Government discriminates against you, and if you complain, calls you a racist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: brookwood

I was merely dismissing the concerns about lack of hydrogen, or the energy budget of obtaining hydrogen, say by electrolysis. This demonstration is not remotely practical, but the net energy obtained by nuclear fusion dwarfs by more than nine orders of magnitude the energy expended obtaining hydrogen, the most common element in the Universe, and quite abundant on earth. Over 80% of all atoms in the Universe are hydrogen.


80 posted on 12/13/2022 2:37:04 PM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson