Nuclear fusion lab sets record for most energy created with single reaction

Nov 20, 2019
46
8
4,535
Visit site
Yes but the energy yeld, be 1 or 2 or whatever, are calculated with Q Plasma, the ratio of energy that actually strikes the fuel versus what energy is produced by the reaction, and not with Q Total, which is all of the energy it takes to charge the magnetic field, and in this latter case a yeld of 1 won't probably ever be attained; these huge technological efforts have careers, lobbying, political and military motivations at most
 
Yes but the energy yeld, be 1 or 2 or whatever, are calculated with Q Plasma, the ratio of energy that actually strikes the fuel versus what energy is produced by the reaction, and not with Q Total, which is all of the energy it takes to charge the magnetic field,
Yes. I tried to find the overall efficiency but this info, as usual, is missing.

Calling Bill. :)
and in this latter case a yeld of 1 won't probably ever be attained; these huge technological efforts have careers, lobbying, political and military motivations at most
The gigantic reward of clean and abundant energy still justifies the effort.
 
Last time they did this, the energy coming into the building was about 100 times what they produced. There is a long way to go. Me personally, I don't place much hope, the temperatures involved are simply too high. If one is after free heat, a gyrotron drilled hole to 20 miles down will do the trick anywhere on Earth. They have not done it yet, but I have more faith in it than fusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Classical Motion
Here is my take on fusion. They claim they need 150e6 K. I know about heat loss by radiation as I had to deal with it in my casting shop. Steffan's law says it goes by the fourth power. I can easily melt brass at 1170 K in my electric furnace, takes about an hour. But when I go to melt copper at 1356 K, it requires 6" of pink glass wool around the kiln and it takes 10 hours. Can barely do it. Fusion is 10e20 times harder than that. I predict we will see commercial fusion in the next 20 years, just as we have said for the last 50 years.
 
Nov 20, 2019
46
8
4,535
Visit site
Here is my take on fusion. They claim they need 150e6 K. I know about heat loss by radiation as I had to deal with it in my casting shop. Steffan's law says it goes by the fourth power. I can easily melt brass at 1170 K in my electric furnace, takes about an hour. But when I go to melt copper at 1356 K, it requires 6" of pink glass wool around the kiln and it takes 10 hours. Can barely do it. Fusion is 10e20 times harder than that. I predict we will see commercial fusion in the next 20 years, just as we have said for the last 50 years.
I was left with the insurmountable problems of descending with mechanical drills below 40k feet, and instead reading your comment I discovered these companies, Quaise and Ga Drilling, which are truly interesting, especially because if there are possibilities we will know in a very short time! another technology that I have always followed since 2011 is cold fusion, it has received several confirmations in recent years, and in particular I am interested in the Italian-American one by Dr. Andrea Rossi (E-Cat), who is labeled a scammer everywhere, but who I contacted personally and who I still give credit to; even in his case it is a short time for confirmation. Instead, I wonder how much truth there is in the numerous, at least five I would say, "hot" fusion technologies that are almost pocket-sized if compared to the gigantic lasers and tokamaks, and which are popping up like mushrooms in recent years, promising to solve the containment problems in much shorter order. They are generally private companies, and that doesn't give me a lot of confidence at the moment.
 
Cold fusion is dead, hot fusion is out of reach. Thermal drilling via gyrotron is a distinct possibility, stay tuned for Quaise results maybe this year (already a year late).
If one drills a 300 mm hole down 40 km, then about 12,000 tons of rock must be blown upwards by a column of argon. It must move upwards at about a meter per second in order to stay aloft. There would be 40,000 seconds worth of dust in the annulus at any one time. If the drill time is 3 months, as they claim, then about 6 tons would be in transit at any one time. An argon pressure of 1000 psi should do it, easily attainable. Argon flow must also be fast enough to cool the glass lining as it is being formed. Downhole pressure must be high enough to prevent the sides from pushing inward. All of these things are within the grasp of current technology.
 

Latest posts