Fusion power?

[Acala]

Now THIS has gotten my attention:
http://news.yahoo.com/lockheed-says-...--finance.html

Lockheed claims to be ten years away from deploying a practical fusion generator. Practical fusion means an end to energy supply problems forever. There may be other problems, such as what to do with all the heat associated with the virtually unlimited energy, but SUPPLY problems - and all the geopolitical side effects - would be over. Pretty excited about this.

[FindLiberty]

Nifty. I want one too.

[Acala]

Nifty. I want one too.

If it turns out to be practical, Lockheed will have twenty of the most profitable years in the history of business and then the patent will expire and the cost of energy will drop to nothing as competitors bring their units to market. Even if our stupid government gets in the way of the market, that genie will never go back in the bottle.

[amy31416]

Woah. I think this is a first for an RPF member to post a reasonable, possibly scientifically sound, article on alternative energy.

Even better:

In recent years, Lockheed has gotten increasingly involved in a variety of alternate energy projects, including several ocean energy projects, as it looks to offset a decline in U.S. and European military spending.

The things we could accomplish if we weren't so busy killing our fellow orangutans would blow people's minds.

[jllundqu]

Bump...

+ rep OP

[fisharmor]

Here's the most important sentence in the article:

A small reactor could power a U.S. Navy warship, and eliminate the need for other fuel sources that pose logistical challenges.

It ain't about free energy, folks.

[jllundqu]

Sorry but did you see the article referenced at the bottom??? LMAO!

Netherlands says OK for biker gangs to fight Islamic State

http://news.yahoo.com/netherlands-sa...155136559.html

[jllundqu]

Here's the most important sentence in the article:


It ain't about free energy, folks.

I'm sure they will find a way to weaponize the fusion reactors in ways we haven't thought of yet, too.

[Ronin Truth]

I'm still holding out a fool's hope for someone, someday solving and explaining the experimental cold fusion result snafus and inconsistencies.

[amy31416]

Sorry but did you see the article referenced at the bottom??? LMAO!



http://news.yahoo.com/netherlands-sa...155136559.html

Missed that! Probably be more effective than our or other governments.

[jllundqu]

Missed that! Probably be more effective than our or other governments.

That should freak ISIS out!

[jllundqu]

Plus that would make a great movie.... I'd pay to see that fight.

[Acala]

Woah. I think this is a first for an RPF member to post a reasonable, possibly scientifically sound, article on alternative energy.

Even better:



The things we could accomplish if we weren't so busy killing our fellow orangutans would blow people's minds.

Too bad convincing people they are being threatened is so easy. Why bother doing anything else?

[Acala]

Here's the most important sentence in the article:


It ain't about free energy, folks.

I believe most Navy ships are already nuclear. Switching them from fission to fusion won't make them more deadly but will make them less toxic if they blow up or sink.

[Acala]

I'm sure they will find a way to weaponize the fusion reactors in ways we haven't thought of yet, too.

They got the weaponizing part of fusion down a long time ago. That was the first priority. Solving the world's energy problems, not so much.

[XNavyNuke]

More details at Aviation Week.
Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details

Operational benefits include no risks of suffering a meltdown. “There is a very minimal amount of radioactive tritium—it’s on the order of grams—so the potential release is very minimal.

Darned good thing that hydrogen isotopes are inert and won't interact with oxygen in the air should a breach occur. That way no one has to worry about blowing apart the entire reactor vessel that has been activated by the continuous D-T neutron flux.

Looks to me to be a benchtop experiment. The quotes at the AW article detaining the team puts a different spin of the press release and subsequent Internet spin.
Meet The Leader Of Skunk Works’ Compact Fusion Reactor Team

“We’re not promising that we have made the jump across the divide. We are being honest about where we are,” he says. “We have made some steps forward, and there is still a lot of work to do, step by step in measured progress.”

The press release sells "break through", interview says incremental step on known problems. Another corporation looking for tax dollars for their pet project.

XNN

[Acala]

More details at Aviation Week.
Skunk Works Reveals Compact Fusion Reactor Details



Darned good thing that hydrogen isotopes are inert and won't interact with oxygen in the air should a breach occur. That way no one has to worry about blowing apart the entire reactor vessel that has been activated by the continuous D-T neutron flux.

Looks to me to be a benchtop experiment. The quotes at the AW article detaining the team puts a different spin of the press release and subsequent Internet spin.
Meet The Leader Of Skunk Works’ Compact Fusion Reactor Team



The press release sells "break through", interview says incremental step on known problems. Another corporation looking for tax dollars for their pet project.

XNN

Hey! Quit raining on my parade!

[Zippyjuan]

We have heard the promise of virtually unlimited and cheap/ practically free energy before. Fission nuclear power was supposed to lead to that.

[Danke]

I already got one.

[Acala]

We have heard the promise of virtually unlimited and cheap/ practically free energy before. Fission nuclear power was supposed to lead to that.

Fission is terribly underutilized as a result of government interference and the unfortunate tendency of human beings to use things like fission reaction products to incinerate each other. And, of course, there is toxicity involved in doing it badly. Fusion reactors don't produce bomb materials, produce relatively little toxic byproducts, and produce dramatically more energy than fission from an essentially inexhaustable source. I don't think there is any question that practical fusion is the holy grail of energy generation. The question is when.

[XNavyNuke]

Fusion reactors don't produce bomb materials, produce relatively little toxic byproducts, and produce dramatically more energy than fission from an essentially inexhaustable source.

Just to clarify, the D-T reaction used by LM release ~14 MeV per fusion. A U-235 atom releases ~200 MeV per fission.

Agree that fission is underutilized. A 1000 MW coal plant uses ~2.5 million tons of coal per year. In that waste stream there is ~50 lbs of U-235. Were it recovered and utilized, the fissioning the 50 lbs would be equivalent to ~60 of those 1000 MW coal plants. (Caveat: ballparking the numerical analysis)

XNN

[Acala]

Just to clarify, the D-T reaction used by LM release ~14 MeV per fusion. A U-235 atom releases ~200 MeV per fission.

So the D-T reaction produces about 4 times the energy of the U-235 fission reaction from the same fuel mass? Not as big a difference as I thought.