We could have carbon-free LIMITLESS ENERGY from nuclear fusion within 15 years, claim MIT scientists

>We could have carbon-free LIMITLESS ENERGY from nuclear fusion within 15 years, claim MIT scientists

dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5490599/Carbon-free-energy-nuclear-fusion-15-years-MIT-says.html

Your face when StarTrek space Communism soon.
How can a system fail with unlimited energy?

Attached: 4A1DCEF300000578-0-image-a-2_1520857128238.jpg (634x357, 74K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=keJAQIWEyzY
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARC_fusion_reactor
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_Compact_Fusion_Reactor
lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html
scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/
youtu.be/gPpYQFtyO98
siliconrepublic.com/machines/nuclear-fusion-reactor-nanowires
youtube.com/watch?v=G8zOHZINyG8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

only if we don't run out of hydrogen.
and figure out matter replication

Did you just fall off the truck?
They said 10 years in 1978, when I visited the fusion labs at Lawrence Livermoore labs with the physics department.
40 years later, these assholes are promising just 15 years! All you got to do is keep funding them.
Here's the clue - fusion funding is the golden goose. Making working fusion would kill the golden goose, and all the goose keepers would be out of a fucking job. It's a goddamned scam.
Not that it can't be done, it has been done... they're just not saying that.

I'll believe it when I see it. Science is always on the brink of the world changing breakthrough but rarely does it materialize the way they expect. Back in the 1960's they were totally sure that self driving cars were just around the corner and by the '70's nobody would be driving themselves. Here we are in 2018 and what do you know, self driving cars are still "just around the corner". Sure there are a few out there, but they still have a tendency to ram into stationary firetrucks and such.

If it seems to good to be true (like LIMITLESS ENERGY FUCK THE BASIC LAWS OF PHYSICS BECAUSE WE WANT IT) it probably is.

Fusion power will never be a thing.

It's a giant funding scam.

I wish Mr. Trump would tweet about our future with fusion power.

>How can a system fail with unlimited energy?
niggers

In this case the "limitless" energy just comes from the fact that the fuel, hydrogen, is extremely abundant and cheap to produce.

>How can a system fail with unlimited energy
Intentional shortages, i.e communism

>LIMITLESS ENERGY FUCK THE BASIC LAWS OF PHYSICS BECAUSE WE WANT IT
Yeah you clearly have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.

Fusion has been '15-20 years away' for the last 70 years.

Well then it's kinda bullshit. The demand will expand to meet the supply no matter what. Oh great we have tons of energy production capability now, so let's build intergalactic spacecraft! (using the example from OP for shits) Except that intergalactic spacecraft will require ludicrous amounts of energy to function therefore putting us back where we started with a finite source of energy and a high demand.

Look, I'm not saying we just give up. I think this would be a good thing, but I just can't get excited about it until I see something happen. They've been talking about this my whole life (and much MUCH longer, 33 btw) and it's still not here. Keep funding it, but also keep expectations realistic, it isn't magic and will be subject to many of the same drawbacks as any of our current energy production methods. It's still the same universe, you don't get anything without giving something else, and that's okay, just don't hang your research hat on doing something impossible.

Every year, fusion is only 15 years away... See you next year

Because in real dollars their funding has been decreasing, when back in the 70s they were admitting that the funding being used for fusion research was nowhere near enough.
If all the funding spent on the solar and wind meme would have been allocated to fusion we would have had it 10 or 20 years ago.

> Fusion has been '15-20 years away' for the last 70 years.

And since the SJW's have been taking over all the tech fields with their anti-rationality witch hunt, fusion will only get farther away.

Oil companies would murder you if you actually discover fusion.

their funding has been decreasing because their results haven't manifested in working technology

>Oil companies would murder you if you actually discover fusion.

basically, yeah.

Hopefully we can get fusion working soon.

>Im fucking plying free energy exists
Thermodynamics says your a faggit.

Yeah I agree the "limitless" energy thing is bullshit because the limit would just be how many fusion generators you could produce. But if it's efficient enough and depending how cheap the fuel is then it's basically limitless but it's really not.

But where do we put the meter?

Attached: 220px-JPMorgan-Young.png (220x221, 40K)

Well that's a pretty stupid way to deal with research, it's speculative by nature and if your nation refuse to sink the prohibitive amounts of money needed, they will fall behind to anyone who does.
Probably would try yeah

Fusion power has been 15 years away for decades.

It's just journalist being journalist. Never trust them to report on what actually was said and done.

Attached: fake news.gif (468x1840, 136K)

>40 years later, these assholes are promising just 15 years! All you got to do is keep funding them.
>Here's the clue - fusion funding is the golden goose.

This.

Fusion power is to science what a cancer cure is to medicine.

Canada has a working plasma reactor that can produce enough heat to vaporize tungsten:
youtube.com/watch?v=keJAQIWEyzY
P-L-A-S-M-A

Attached: SAFIREprogect2017.png (1499x1077, 1.23M)

Somehow I doubt it. The byproducts of nuclear fusion experiments is that they can also be used for weapons experiments. I personally believe that the Lockheed announcement a few years ago is legit. I would also bet my left nut that it was walked back because the working unit utilized classified technology learned from other Lockheed/DoD projects that are unable to be disclosed to the public for reasons of national security.

> next Big Thing for the last 50 years
Fusion
Artificial Intelligence
Flying Cars
> stop niggering in nig nog thread

Attached: 1521130036692.jpg (500x553, 208K)

I wonder how long until it's a weapon.

we have fusion reactors that can generate absurd amounts of power right now, the problem is getting net gain

based on recent-ish (in fusion) developments, we should legitimately get break-even within the next decade

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARC_fusion_reactor

>To achieve a near tenfold increase in fusion power density, the design makes use of rare-earth barium-copper-oxide superconducting tape for its toroidal field coils.[2] The intense magnetic field allows sufficient confinement of superhot plasma in such a small device. In theory, the achievable fusion power density of a reactor is proportional to the fourth power of the magnetic field intensity.[1]

>ARC is a 270 MWe tokamak reactor with a major radius of 3.3 m, a minor radius of 1.1 m, and an on-axis magnetic field of 9.2 teslas (T).[2]

>The design point has a plasma fusion gain Qp ≈ 13.6, yet is fully non-inductive, with a bootstrap fraction of ~63%.[2]

So, how much exactly has that whole "Let's invest a bunch in female led startups because muh progressivism" thing has actually let to profits, instead of chapter 11 and massive shareholder losses?

>Those sanpaku eyes

About as much as AI, fusion... zero.

>About as much as AI, fusion... zero.

No, AI is already a thing, it's real and classified by several governments.

Fusion on the other hand, is sort of set up to fail.

Sadly no about AI. "Imitation intelligence" is what an AI guy I know from 90s calls it. He does Ruby on Rails now.

>Sadly no about AI. "Imitation intelligence" is what an AI guy I know from 90s calls it. He does Ruby on Rails now.

Well, that's the public sector AI.

Making a General AI is actually a lot easier than most people believe.

You troll is rated 1/10.
> learn OPS5

Attached: 1521260459977.gif (480x270, 70K)

This broad is up for financial fraud to the order of $700m

>You troll is rated 1/10.

*Your

ftfy

That might be a bit optimistic, but fusion tech is producing more and better results yearly. It's a matter of time.

Water is two part hydrogen, I feel like it is something you island monkeys should know

I would bet the winner uses aneutronic gamma ray beams for the lasers. There is lots of Defense interest in annihilation radiation-driven GRASERs. The US was looking into induced gamma emmissions from hafnium isomers for a replacement as the primary in nuclear weapons. It was deemed to expensive at the time, but did result in a classified dissertation. Fast forward to early 2000s and there was some buzz about the USAF being very interested in positronium for a whole host of projects and anti-matter research.

>How can a system fail with unlimited energy?

Hold my beer....

Attached: stalin-smiling.jpg (344x400, 70K)

What are you gonna do about the petrodollar oligarchs who will muster all their shekels to stop fusion from destroying their financial empires?

The petrodollar is gonna collapse in the coming decades anyway.

it's limitless in the sense that we have enough fuel to last a gorillion years and there's loads of it all over the universe

SAFIRE is already here you stupid shit eating Luddites
Fucking retarded mutts, all of you

This.

Attached: 1493182085640.png (500x500, 49K)

At the moment, we're basically wasting time, resources and funding on fusion. Thorium molten salt reactors are extremely promising, we should focus on that instead.

I'm also reliably informed this is the year of the Linux desktop

fusion power is like Brazil. It's always the future. That never arrives.

>Not that it can't be done, it has been done...

proof?

the universe is mostly hydrogen my dude
I dont think replicator technology will ever be possible

Attached: 1520573150519.png (756x556, 646K)

AHAHAHAHAH, someone is looking for funding for the next 15 years

>I personally believe that the Lockheed announcement a few years ago is legit.

What announcement would that be?

No, we should be funding research into both.

A bullshit announcement. (((They))) are still making far too much money on oil to release fusion power.

You can fuck anything up, including unlimited energy. Look at Africa, unlimited resources.

tl/dr we are niggers within 15 years.

Lockheed Martin is going to beat them to the punch.

The Skunk Works has been working on trash can sized fusion reactors for a few decades and recently let slip they're very close to succeeding.

Imagine that. Fusion powered big rigs, ships, airliners, etc. That would be revolutionary.

A tokomak / stellarator style enormous reactor is never going to work. It's a mega project. All of those designs require entire warehouses full of lasers just to achieve ignition. It's never going to happen, and if it does, it's going to be useless and unable to be mass produced.

The true fusion breakthrough will be when we can miniaturize these things. If it's not trash can sized, I'm not excited.

can i get some more information plz?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_Compact_Fusion_Reactor

lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html

scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/

cold fusion or hot fusion?

False analogy, there are cures for certain cancers.

You realize all economically useful power plants are warehouse sized, right?

This is called economy of scale. It is why you don't have a coal powerplant in your back yard, and it is also why you will never have a fusion reactor (unless you are a prepper or some dumb shit).

Would we be able to mount these on soldiers backs to power some sort of armored suit?

unlimited energy wont get you star trek space communism, are you fucking retarded? why am i even asking

what is linus doing here?

youtu.be/gPpYQFtyO98

cold fusion is a meme

:(

what does everyone think of this?

siliconrepublic.com/machines/nuclear-fusion-reactor-nanowires

>Using small but powerful lasers, a team of researchers has achieved a substantial breakthrough with record efficiency in a micro-scale nuclear fusion reactor.

Physicists from Colorado State University (CSU) have taken us another step closer to achieving near-limitless, clean energy with nuclear fusion following a breakthrough that replaces equipment valued at hundreds of millions of dollars with something that can fit on a tabletop.

>....................These plasmas then drive fusion reactions, giving off helium and flashes of energetic neutrons at an astonishing level of efficiency – 500 times better than experiments using conventional flat targets from the same material.

The key to the team’s success is using a material called deuterated polyethylene for the nanowires. It is similar to the widely used polyethylene plastic, but its common hydrogen atoms are substituted by deuterium, a heavier kind of hydrogen atom.

>Looks at sun.

>>Looks at sun.

When you manage to bring that down here, i'll be impressed.

Hot. My guess would be some of ways they control the plasma dynamics is related to how some of their classified aircraft go fast or for light-antimatter containment.

We could have carbon free energy today using breeder fission reactors.
With the right types we could even have carbon neutral liquid fuels (gasoline, diesel, kerosene) for transport needs.

youtube.com/watch?v=G8zOHZINyG8

Fusion is nice, but Fission actually works.

Attached: seafuel.jpg (1087x664, 142K)

how hot are we talking here? what fuckin material can contain something over 1000c?

>With the right types we could even have carbon neutral liquid fuels (gasoline, diesel, kerosene) for transport needs.

brainlet here, what?

Its been done multiple times before simply never contained

He's talking about alchemy. It's pants on head retarded.

Like, hot as fuck. It's magnetically contained plasma.

Hydrocarbons are hydrogen and carbon. When you burn them with oxygen you get water H2O and CO2. CO2 in the air will dissolve into water to reach an equilibrium; having more CO2 in water and it comes out into the air, having more CO2 in the air and will will dissolve into water.

The limit is the energy input of breaking the H2O and CO2 up into H2 and C. This takes energy, mostly for breaking the water up. Electrolysis you say and that's correct. What they didn't tell you is that higher temperature nuclear reactors are much more efficient at making electricity.

Most nuclear reactors use water in the liquid state which puts the upper limit at the critical point of water (373C). If you use a different cooling medium like salt it's liquid to a higher temperature. This lets you heat water/steam past that critical point. The higher the temperature the better your energy conversion.

If you really want to get fancy then you can use 800C salt to heat compressed air in a turbine. It needs to be above about 500C because that's how hot the air gets when the turbine compresses it, and you only get energy out from the difference. Clearly you can't use 373C to heat 500C air in a turbine.

Long story short hotter reactors = more energy for less money. More energy = lower costs to crack hydrogen and carbon. Lower hydrogen costs = lower liquid fuel costs.
Or you can't make economical liquid fuels from current light water reactors, the cost of energy is too high.

it's basically made for solar power towers, isn't it?

Wouldn’t be surprised if it has been for awhile

>How can a system fail with unlimited energy?

Women and niggers.

inside of a steel ball thats liquid cooled or something?

Nah, it's that nobody wanted to pay for the next node in the sequence to achieving breakeven. The EU delayed and delayed and delayed, for an entire decade, before they even broke ground on the digsite for ITER. Small wonder fusion plans have stalled.

>Eurocucks in charge of expediting important scientific and engineering research

Attached: moores_law.jpg (480x397, 50K)

>it's basically made for solar power towers, isn't it?
Molten salt breeder reactors.
Sure any cheap source of electricity works but you get a deal with nuclear reactors because the electrical grid demand is high during the day and low at night. This gives you something to do with your power plants at night when demand is 20% of peak. Make electrical power during the day, make diesel and gasoline at night.

Limitless source of energy doesn't mean it will be useful even if they achieve it.
Just like renewables, it's largely a meme. Coal, gas and hydro are still top dogs when it comes to power plants and gasoline is unsurpassed when it comes to transport.

Energy companies make cargo ships more money than fusion researchers.

Comparing fusion to a cure for cancer is a false equivalency because after a cure for cancer is found the problem is solved. If fusion technology were to become successful the availability of energy would skyrocket and thing that were previously not energy effective would become so. Basically, what I'm saying is that after the success of fusion technology the demand for fusion would be higher than ever.

> ENERGY from nuclear fusion within 15 years
Funny, that was said in the 80's, the 90's, and last decade. Fusion has been 'just around the corner' for 50 years now
>How can a system fail with unlimited energy?
It's not unlimited, but a good step forward.

>Make electrical power during the day, make diesel and gasoline at night.

That could possibly solve load balancing problems.

According to that graph we should have vad fusion power plants in 2005, so where are they? Moore's law has also lost steam and it's no longer consistently doubling.

what does cern do? anything similar?

>Limitless source of energy doesn't mean it will be useful even if they achieve it.

Dirt cheap energy causing a massive spike in electric transportation and making heating nearly free

It would change everything

>According to that graph we should have vad fusion power plants in 2005, so where are they?

ITER was supposed to be built and operational in 2005, that's how badly the European Union dropped the ball on this whole thing.

My sides. Nuclear fusion has been "fifteen years away" for fifty years.

The stars say you're a dummy.

CERN isn't a fusion reactor, it's a particle physics research lab. They perform fusion there, but it's not trying to get breakeven power out of it, as far as I know.

no its a particle accelerator that looks at particles that make up atoms